Pensions
Age has been designed to provide pensions professionals with a
single and authoritative source of information.
Time
to start hitting the target
Christopher Andrews finds
that default funds need to change – and fast – if defined
contribution (DC) scheme members are to see their retirement expectations
being met
For many years
there has been a drive within the pensions industry to improve education
and communication, getting members to take more of an active interest
in their own retirement provision. To a degree this drive has seen
some success, evidenced by the number of DC scheme members who simply
tick their plan's default option and then forget about it; there
are some 82 per cent in a default option – where the scheme
allows – down from 91 per cent last year, according to the
NAPF's annual survey.
Of course, despite the level of financial prowess among scheme members,
for many, the default could actually be the best option available
to them, providing it is properly structured and effectively mirrors
the members' risk appetite. However, the question remains whether
the majority of default funds are actually delivering the goods
and living up to member expectations. The answer is probably not.
A standard lifestyle option, used by the majority of DC plans, generally
consists of a portfolio of passively managed global equities, switching
into bonds and cash five or 10 years before retirement. This can
work given the right market conditions, and there is a degree of
diversification involved by the very nature of global equities.
But if the timing is wrong, you're in trouble.
For example, in current market conditions, if a member is, say,
55 and their fund has not yet switched into bonds and cash, then
"arguably your entire plan has gone down the drain because
you've just lost 30 per cent of everything you've built up,"
says Steve Rumbles, head of UK DC at BlackRock. Alternatively, given
the automated nature of most lifestyle funds – which don't
take account of market conditions – for a 60 year old whose
fund has actually switched into bonds and cash, those vast equity
losses will have been crystallised, with no chance of recovery,
even if retirement is delayed.
However, for a 25 year old, current conditions are theoretically
good news, as equity units can be bought cheaply now, and these
should rise again in value. But, says Rumbles, 25 year olds generally
don't see this rosy picture and react poorly to market losses whatever
the time frame, failing to appreciate that pensions are a long term
savings plan. "On that basis," he says, "the default
option is not meeting members' expectations of why they selected
it in the first place."
Meeting
expectations
So how can these expectations actually be met? Ideally members want
limited volatility as their fund grows and a pot of money at the
end, representative of what they've put into it. This means that
how default funds are managed, their asset mix, and how the lifestyling
element functions, need a re-think.
In terms of that lifestyling element, according to Dr Alistair Byrne,
senior lecturer in finance at the University of Edinburgh Business
School, we need to develop a more dynamic approach, with mechanisms
that actually take account of market conditions. "So something
that would potentially switch off the lifestyling mechanism if market
conditions warranted that," he says. "Most of what's out
there at the moment is deterministic, pre- programmed switching."
Alternatively, says Gary Smith, senior consultant at Watson Wyatt,
the move into protection assets should perhaps be made earlier,
or "perhaps the transition from growth to transition shouldn't
be a linear process, maybe it should be an accelerating transition."
(BlackRock’s DC Banking programme goes some way towards accomplishing
this already).
Both of these would help to avoid crystallising loss, and smooth
the transition away from equities. But perhaps an all equities portfolio
isn't appropriate in the first place. Rather, there is now a move
towards diversified growth approaches for default funds, containing
equities, as well as alternative assets which should perform differently
if there is volatility in equity markets, being spread across several
active fund managers.
The benefit of this, says Julian Webb, head of DC business development
at Fidelity, is diversification and removal of single manager risk,
while being able (for trust based DC anyway) to change the mix of
assets and managers at will without the members having to select
alternative funds. "The member selects the fund wrapper, and
then the trustees decide on the components of that fund," he
says.
Webb points out that diversified growth funds are also being used
to provide risk graded options, depending on the risk appetite of
the member. "And if you get this structure right," he
says, "it negates the need for lots of funds, so it simplifies
the structure of the fund line-up as well".
And Rumbles argues that diversified growth funds do live within
a lifestyle matrix, not as an alternative to lifestyle but as an
alternative to equities within the lifestyle plan. He also says
that there are ways to use risk graded funds to better match member
expectations. This may involve starting off in a safer fund allowing
the member to settle in, and then moving into an aggressive fund
before returning to that safer option in the run-up to fully switching
into cash and bonds. "It fits in more with how members behave.
We as an industry have to recognise who our end client is, and deliver
products that work for those people."
Nick Leitch, head of investment management at Scottish Life, says
there are a number of other elements which should become standard
offerings within the default arrangement. These include that improved
automatic lifestyling, but also a range of risk profiling solutions,
a proper asset allocation mix and, very importantly, a governance
overlay. "Charge is important as well," he says, pointing
out that Scottish Life provides these offerings at no additional
cost within their fund range. "And this is key. In today's
environment employers have got to focus on saving as much money
as possible."
Cost
and governance
Not all firms are providing these services gratis; active management
and governance overlay usually come at a cost, and "costs are
probably too high, as a very broad generalisation," says Smith,
believing that there needs to be much more focus on added value.
And he thinks that employers need to consider if they have the governance
budget to allow active management in the first place, as many schemes
put active management in the default without any real governance
overlay to monitor it.
"You may end up paying a reasonably higher fee for, quite frankly,
a fairly mediocre active manager that's not adding any extra value,"
he says.
"It is difficult to work with active management in contract
based schemes for the reason of governance," agrees Dr Byrne.
"If a problem does arise with a manager it can be difficult
to deal with in a contract based scheme. It is difficult for trustees,
but at least the mechanisms are there."
It is worth noting that even in contract based schemes, pressure
has been growing to increase the standard of governance, and management
style committees to oversee and review pension arrangements are
being strongly encouraged. "And we're going to see pressure
coming from members asking questions regarding investment returns
and default funds, but also from the Regulator, who has already
made it clear in relation to DC that they're expecting (more) employer
engagement," says Tony Barnard, technical consultant at Gissings.
"At the moment it is all described as good practice; the question
is how long it will remain just good practice before it becomes
[mandatory] to have some form of management committee in place if
you're running a DC scheme."
Engaging
members
While Barnard sees this pressure coming from members eventually,
at the moment that pressure isn't really being applied, despite
considerable improvements in communication and education. This will
probably change in April, and will more likely come as shouting
and fist waving rather than calm dialogue. As a case in point, Rumbles
says that on one of BlackRock's member record keeping platforms,
they have 175,000 members, and despite the state of the economy,
have only received a pitiful 10 phone calls about the markets.
However, come April, which is typically when members start to receive
benefit statements, look out. "I would expect the calls in
May and June to go through the roof, when people see a statement
that says you've saved £10,000 this year, you should be very
proud of yourself, but unfortunately you've lost it all and a bit
more. That's when the hurricane will hit."
And after 2012, when auto enrolment is introduced, this hurricane
could be all the more destructive in terms of litigation. "By
[auto enrolment's] very nature, people are going to be enrolled
in default funds, and that's why we can't just sit back and say
we can't solve the default problem, we have to," says Webb.
"There's a window of opportunity in the next couple of years
where trustees and employers really need to be getting to grips
with their DC," says Smith. "The current crisis has tested
and put the spotlight on provision, and now we need to take the
initiative and come out of this in a much stronger way."