The treatment of investment risk in corporate pension plans probably is the least satisfactory area in the establishment of investment objectives. In spite of all the work published on risk in the investment literature of the past several years, risk tolerance often is not specified in setting investment objectives. Sometimes, statements of risk are made in general terms (e.g., the fund should not suffer a loss in any designated period) or a maximum tolerable decline in asset value is specified. Such specifications of risk are very difficult for an investment manager to deal with. (more…)

Although practices may differ with respect to the involvement of the corporate sponsor in objective setting and asset allocation retirement, selection of investment managers is rarely delegated. In terms of dollars of assets, most funds are managed by investment managers outside of the corporation, inasmuch as few companies have the internal expert staff needed to perform this function. Moreover, corporate management may prefer to delegate the fiduciary responsibility for investment, and some companies believe that having outside managers reduces some of the problems with respect to pensions in labor negotiations. (more…)

This is usually referred to as the actuarial accrued liability. It is that portion of the actuarial present value of all future benefits (PVFB) that is assigned by the actuarial method to the period prior to the valuation date. present value of all future benefits is the present value of all benefits accrued and unaccrued, past and future. It is a measure of the total obligations of the plan, past and future. That portion assigned to the past is called the actuarial accrued liability. This concept will be discussed again later in the section on actuarial methods. Due to the wide variety of actuarial methods in use, the same plan and assumptions can generate Significantly different actuarial accrued liabilities. In fact, one commonly used method (Aggregate Actuarial Cost) produces a zero actuarial accrued liability by definition. It funds costs over future payrolls only. (more…)

There are two traditional ways to value pension plan assets, i.e., market value and book value (cost). The actuary has always been skeptical about using market value due to the frequency of large short-term swings in security prices. In order to use market value properly, the actuary should value the liabilities at market also, which implies changing the interest rate assumption each year to meet the changing condition of the securities marketplace. This approach is, in fact, what is encouraged by FASB No. 35, which requires market value of assets to be used for disclosure purposes. There is an illusion of accuracy connected with market values because of the assumption that securities could be converted to cash at published prices. In fact, it is questionable whether any large fund could be liquidated with rapidity and if many tried to do so simultaneously, the entire securities market would collapse. (more…)

The treatment of investment risk probably is the least satisfactory area in the establishment of investment objectives. In spite of all the work published on risk in the investment literature of the past several years, risk tolerance often is not specified in setting investment objectives and investment performance measurement. Sometimes, statements of risk are made in general terms (e.g., the fund should not suffer a loss in any designated period) or a maximum tolerable decline in asset value is specified. Such specifications of risk are very difficult for an investment manager to deal with. (more…)

The US Federal Government is in its death throes. It is thrashing around, writhing on the floor, like a person suffering a grand mal seizure.

The Obama Administration, The Federal Reserve and Congress are completely clueless on the methods necessary to bring America back from the financial precipice. (more…)