Monday, March 3, 2008 Session 9 – 2:30 PM to 3:20 PM Michael Crowley and Wayne G. Bogosian 401(k) Plan Fees … How does your Plan compare? 2008 Benefits New York New York, NY
Dec 23, 2015
Monday, March 3, 2008
Session 9 – 2:30 PM to 3:20 PM
Michael Crowley and Wayne G. Bogosian
Monday, March 3, 2008
Session 9 – 2:30 PM to 3:20 PM
Michael Crowley and Wayne G. Bogosian
401(k) Plan Fees … How does your Plan compare?
2008 Benefits New YorkNew York, NY
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 3
Workshop Objectives
Current Events in Fee Disclosure
Revenue Sharing – Good, Bad or Illegal?
Case Study: Benchmarking 401(k) Plan Fees
What is a “reasonable” fee?
Getting ready for “full fee disclosure”?
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 4
Current Events in Fee Disclosure
2004 Department of Labor ERISA Advisory Council to Review 401(k) Plan Fees (12/9/2004)– 15-member council appointed by the Secretary of Labor (union, employer, provider and "public" representatives)– Result of Council/Congressional Action/Litigation is three-step initiative (1) Revised Form 5500 Schedule C (confirm that all fees have been disclosed to sponsor;
(2) ERISA §408(b)(2) prohibited transaction exemption for fiduciaries who get written service agreements showing all provider fees;
(3) Disclosing plan fees to participants, thereby confirming fees are reasonable
401(k) Fee Lawsuits (9/2006)– Claims by Plaintiffs: Fiduciaries were “unaware” of plan expenses
2006 GAO Report Recommendations (11/2006)– Findings: Few participants understand plan fees– Recommendations: Report all fees paid from plan assets and paid by participants provide easy comparison
between funds 401(k) Congress Holds Fee-Related Hearings (3/6/2007) DOL (EBSA) Requests Comment on 401(k) Fee Disclosures (4/20/2007)
– Question: What information do participants require to make investment decisions? Miller (D-CA) Introduces “401(k) Fair Disclosure for Retirement Security Act of 2007” (7/26/2007) DOL Issues Proposed Regulation on Fee Disclosure (12/12/2007)
– ERISA §408(b)(2) requires plan fees to be “reasonable”– Plan sponsors require “full disclosure” of fees to make reasonableness assessment – Requires ALL plan service providers to disclose all methods of compensation (direct and indirect), conflicts of
interest, etc. – Plan fiduciaries receive prohibited transaction exemption if FULL disclosure is requested from all service providers
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 5
Current Events in Fee Disclosure (continued)
Court Decisions– Exelon (2/21/2007): US District Court of Northern District of IL granted motion to
exclude investment losses from plaintiff’s suit. No connection was drawn between participant investment losses and defendant’s failure to disclose administration fees.
– John Deere (6/29/2007): US District Court of Western District of WI dismissed “excessive fee” fiduciary breach case.
– United Technologies (8/9/2007): US District Court of CT granted motion to dismiss claim of fiduciary breach for failure to disclose revenue share arrangements but allowed it to proceed on a misrepresentation theory.
– Phones Plus v. Hartford FSG (10/23/2007): US District Court denies motion to dismiss “revenue sharing as plan assets” case. Plaintiff claimed: (1) Hartford was plan fiduciary and therefore receipt of revenue sharing was a prohibited transaction, and (2) Investment Adviser, as a fiduciary, had a duty to investigate, discover and inform plaintiff of Hartford’s use of revenue sharing dollars.
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 6
Current Events in Fee Disclosure (continued)
Court Decisions– Tullis v. UMB Bank (1/28/2008): Appeals Court allows an individual to seek
recovery of plan assets without resorting to a class action.
– Tussey v. UBB, Inc. (2/11/2008): US District Court of Western District of MO rules that plan sponsor and Fidelity had no fiduciary duty to disclose revenue sharing fees. However, the court denies motion to dismiss, declining to adopt the Deere decision’s rationale. Rather, the court rules that the failure to disclose revenue share arrangements is relevant to a 404(c) defense because that defense requires that plan losses be caused by a plan participant exercising control over investments. A jury could find that plan losses related to revenue sharing fees were not caused by a plan participant who was ignorant of the revenue sharing fees when choosing investments.
– LaRue v. Dewolff (2/20/2008): Supreme Court ruling allows individuals to recover (vs. entire plan) from fiduciaries.
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 7
Fiduciary and Participant Responsibility
Participant Responsibility
• Understand benefits & costs of plan participation
• Select investments • Monitor account performance• Make changes when appropriate
Fiduciary Responsibility
• Design/operate plan according to “rules”• Select, negotiate and monitor service
providers and agreements• Develop “Investment Structure”• Select, monitor, hire/fire managers• Communicate plan performance and
fees to participants
“What information do plan participants need to make confident decisions?”
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 8
Fiduciary and Participant Responsibility (continued)
Required Statutory Disclosures(Enrollment Form, SPD, Form 5500, SAR)
• Investment Fees (prospectus) Fund expense ratios Contingent redemption fees
• Administration Fees Paid from Plan Recordkeeping Loans, distributions, QDRO Transactions Compliance, Legal, Inv. Advisory, Audit
“Will more information make participants better investors or plan sponsors better fiduciaries?”
Desired Statutory Disclosures(New Notice Requirements)
• Participant Investments – Name, objective, risks,
OER, CRF, performance Administration – All fees paid by
participants or plan• Plan Sponsor
Written service agreements w/all service providers
Disclose all provider revenue sources Disclose all conflicts of interest Document fees on Form 5500 Sch. C
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 9
Your Personalized Expense Ratio
InvestmentCategory
Investment Option
CurrentAllocation
to Fund
Expense Ratio(bp)*
WeightedAverage Expense
(bp)*
Industry AverageExpense
(bp)*
Industry Average
Weighted Expense
(bp)*
Cash Equivalent Schwab Stable Vale 5% 50 2.50 65 3.25
Fixed Income PIMCO Total Return (Ins) 21% 43 9.00 102 21.42
Fixed Income PIMCO Real Return 14% 45 6.30 99 13.86
Real Estate Morgan Stanley Ins U.S. RE (A) 5% 89 4.50 154 7.70
Large Cap Value MainStay ICAP (I) 14% 80 11.20 134 18.76
Large Cap Growth Growth Fund of America (R5) 11% 36 3.96 142 15.62
Mid Cap Value Janus Adviser Mid Cap Value (I) 7% 75 5.25 141 9.87
Mid Cap Growth MainStay Mid Cap Growth (I) 5% 110 5.50 154 7.70
Small Cap Value Third Avenue Small-Cap Value 4% 113 4.52 155 6.20
Small Cap Growth Baron Small Cap 3% 133 3.99 166 4.98
International AF EuroPacific Growth A 9% 80 7.20 153 13.77
Emerging Markets Lazard Emerging Markets 2% 127 2.54 190 3.80
YOUR INVESTMENT EXPENSE 66.44 126.93
YOUR ADMINISTRATION EXPENSE 5.00 0.00
YOUR TOTAL EXPENSE 71.44 126.93
WHAT IS MY TOTAL COST FOR PLAN ADMINISTRATION AND INVESTMENT
MANAGEMENT?
You pay $0.71
out of every $100 you invest in your plan
The average investor would pay $1.27
out of every $100 they invest
*A basis point (bp) is a unit that is equal to 1/100th of 1% (i.e., 0.01% = .0001 = 1 basis point or $0.01 on $100 invested), and is used to denote the change in a financial instrument.
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 10
Sources of Provider Revenues (“Economic Benefit”)
Proprietary Product Placement– Fully “bundled” using ALL/MOSTLY proprietary product is MOST profitable– Internal “revenue crediting rates” (for proprietary funds) differ by fund company– Default fund option (Life Cycle, Managed Accounts)– Spreads (fixed income products)
Non-Proprietary Product Revenues– Revenue sharing arrangement & 12b-1 fees – Sales commission– Yield spread – Wrap fees– Sub Transfer Fees & Shareholder Service Fees– Brokerage “shelf-space” Fees– Preferred Provider or Placement Fees– “Soft-dollar” Brokerage (proprietary & third-party research)– Directed brokerage (for investment products other than mutual funds)– Other: Allowances, Subsidies, Conferences, Reciprocal Referrals, Directed
Brokerage, Rollovers upon Termination
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 11
Is “Revenue Sharing” Good, Bad or Illegal?
INVESTMENT CATEGORY
INVESTMENT OPTION
EXPENSE RATIO (Component Parts) (%)*
EXP. RATIO*
REVENUE SHARE TO SERVICE
PROVIDER
CATEGORY AVG EXP.
RATIO (%)*Inv. Mgt.
Distribution (12b-1)
Other
Cash Equivalent Proprietary Stable Value 6 bp 0 bp 44 bp 50 bp 44 bp N/A
Fixed Income PIMCO Total Return (Ins) 25 bp 0 bp 18 bp 43 bp 0 bp 102 bp
Allocation Strategy Moderate Allocation Strategy 40 bp 0 bp 18 bp 58 bp 16 bp 108 bp
Balanced Proprietary Balanced (Ins) 75bp 0 bp 11 bp 86 bp 75 bp 113 bp
Allocation Strategy Aggressive Allocation Strategy 63 bp 1 bp 11 bp 75 bp 22 bp 113 bp
Real Estate Morgan Stanley Ins U.S. RE (A) 76 bp 0 bp 13 bp 89 bp 10 bp 154 bp
Large Cap Value Proprietary Equity (I) 80 bp 0 bp 0 bp 80 bp 50 bp 134 bp
Large Cap Index BGI Equity Index (Q) 5 bp 0 bp 1 bp 6 bp 1 bp 115 bp
Large Cap Growth Growth Fund of America (R5) 28 bp 0 bp 8 bp 36 bp 5 bp 142 bp
Mid Cap Value Janus Adviser Mid Cap Value (I) 64 bp 0 bp 11 bp 75 bp 10 bp 141 bp
Mid Cap Index Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Adm 11 bp 0 bp 2 bp 13 bp 0 bp 143 bp
Small Cap Value Third Avenue Small-Cap Value 90 bp 0 bp 23 bp 113 bp 0 bp 155 bp
Small Cap Index Vanguard Small-Cap Index Adm 10 bp 0 bp 3 bp 13 bp 0 bp 144 bp
Small Cap Growth Baron Small Cap 100 bp 25 bp 8 bp 133 bp 35 bp 166 bp
International Proprietary International (I) 80 bp 0 bp 0 bp 80 bp 50 bp 153 bpSource: Morningstar 2007; Fund Prospectus
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 12
About NFA
• Founded 1982• Nationwide Self-Regulatory Org. for
US Futures Industry (not-for-profit)• 280 Employees• $58M 401(k)/Profit Sharing Plan• 99% Participation• 8.33% Avg. Deferral• Auto-enrollment @ 6%• QDIA – Balanced Fund • 20 Plan Funds
13 Active Managers 5 Index Managers 3 Risk-based Strategies
• Avg. participant uses 7 plan funds• Formal Plan Oversight
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 13
Fiduciary Committee – Plan Oversight
Retained Responsibilities (Non-Delegated)– Fiduciary Oversight (“Benefit Plan Trustees”)
– Committee Charter and Investment Policy
– Fund Manager Performance
– Fee Analysis (Total and Vendor-specific)
– Service Provider Oversight
Delegated Committee Responsibilities– Trust (directed-trustee)
– Plan Administration (day-to-day recordkeeping)
– Investment Advisory
– ERISA Counsel
– Communications and Education
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 14
“State-of-the-Plan” Report to Board of Directors
Purpose: Inform Board of the Actions of their Appointed Fiduciaries– Plan Amendments and Material Modifications
– Claims and Appeals
– Plan Administration
– Plan Demographics
– Plan Qualification
– Litigation
– Agents (ERISA Counsel, Inv. Advisor, Auditor)
– Plan Expenses
– Plan Funds
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 15
Plan Fees Paid by Participants
EXPENSEANNUAL PARTICIPANT PAID FEES
(based upon Total Plan Assets of $57,000,000 as of 12/31/2007)
Fees for Plan Administration $125,000 or
$298/participant22 basis points
Fees for Investment Management, Shareholder,
Distribution and Other Services
$251,000 or $599/participant
44 basis points
Total Annual Fees Paid by Participants
$376,000 or $897/participant
66 basis points
NFA’s Average Account Balance is ~ $138,000
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 16
How Does NFA Compare to All Plans?Benchmark Comparison of Plan Fees to PFE 401(k) Database – ALL PLANS
DATABASE PROFILE
Mean Median NFA
Plan Assets $995 Million $451 Million $58 Million
Participants 20,684 10,326 419
Avg. Account Size $48,118 $43,709 $138,000
Inv. Expense (bp) 57 bp 54 bp 44 bp
Admin. Expense ($) $161 $140 $298
PFE 401(k) DATABASE PROFILE – ALL PLANS
The PFE 401(k) Plan Expense Database contains information from 242 defined contribution plans, ranging in size from $442,000 to $16 billion and from industries such as industrial, retail, professional services, financial services, non-profit, technology, consumer products, and entertainment. Total assets in the database are approximately $243 billion spread among more than 5 million accounts.
Plans in PFE’s expense database have been submitted by fee-only investment consultants and some service providers. It is highly likely these plans are among the most competitively priced 401(k) plans in the United States
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 17
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
How Does NFA Compare to All Plans? (Continued)
PERCENTILE INVESTMENTS* ADMINISTRATION* TOTAL COST*5 $59 $53 $139
25 $134 $101 $24650 $200 $157 $35175 $289 $233 $41795 $563 $491 $582
NFA Forecast $538 (41 bp) $384 (29 bp) $922 (70 bp)
NFA Actual $599 (44 bp) $298 (22 bp) $897 (66 bp)
401k Source Mid Plan Avg.** $584 (119 bp) $15 (2 bp) $599 (122 bp)
*This table ranks ACTUAL investment, administration and total expenses for 242 plans in the PFE database. Actual expenses are influenced by average account size and asset allocation. Figures for Total Cost, Investments and Administration are independent of each other (mutually exclusive). ** 401k Source Averages Book© 2007 8th edition Mid plan is defined as assets of $40 million and million w/approximately 1,000 participants
$600
$700
$800
$900
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 18
NFA vs. Comparable Plans by Plan Assets
Investment Expense Only
IndustryTotal Plan
AssetsCompany
Stock# of
AccountsAvg. Account
Size*Total Inv
Expense**
Inv Expense
(bp)**
Average Cost Per
Account**
Industrial $81,044,815 $7,292,497 1,686 $48,081 $99,620 14 $59
Professional Svcs $35,681,201 $0 498 $71,649 $56,739 16 $114
Industrial $54,260,731 $0 581 $93,392 $91,317 17 $157
Professional Svcs $70,294,370 $0 1,280 $54,917 $205,864 29 $161
Professional Svcs $81,139,048 $0 1,056 $76,836 $238,960 30 $226
Health Care $32,079,183 $0 419 $76,561 $109,971 34 $262
Financial $27,140,254 $0 574 $47,283 $100,540 38 $175
Industrial $23,015,306 $0 725 $31,745 $87,029 40 $120
Professional Svcs $61,280,897 $0 736 $83,262 $265,982 43 $361
Professional Svcs $35,118,675 $0 470 $74,721 $149,669 43 $318
Professional Svcs $79,919,515 $0 652 $122,576 $351,100 44 $538
Industrial $51,347,282 $0 378 $135,839 $223,498 44 $591
NFA $57,659,094 $0 419 $137,611 $251,486 44 $599
Entertainment $30,632,811 $0 550 $55,696 $153,401 50 $279
Non-Profit $47,447,000 $0 1,802 $26,330 $269,142 57 $149
Industrial $28,861,702 $0 1,580 $18,267 $166,074 59 $105
Health Care $53,041,345 $0 1,103 $48,081 $325,858 61 $295
Industrial $56,438,692 $0 1,058 $53,345 $311,375 63 $294
Consumer/Misc Prods $63,565,086 $0 2,000 $31,783 $478,315 75 $239
Industrial $67,600,000 $0 3,700 $18,270 $521,282 77 $141
Health Care/Med Svcs $75,907,292 $0 13,000 $5,839 $610,531 80 $47
* Includes Company Stock. ** Includes all funds-Life Cycle, Life Style and Company Stock funds
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 19
Benchmarking Fees … Easier Said Than Done
No Benchmarking Survey Can Capture all Plan Expenses– Loan, Distribution, and Ad Hoc Fees can be substantial – Managed Account fees are often not counted – Expenses paid by plan sponsors are often not reported (as a result overall fee looks low for
these sponsors when compared to all-in expensing)
Not all Plans are created equal – What provider services do you use?– How complex is your plan design?– How “demanding” are you?
What services are of value to “your” plan and participants, but incur additional cost?– Independent Investment Advisor– ERISA Counsel– Demographic-specific communications– Financial education and one-on-one counseling
Index and ETF Plans vs. Active Manager Plans – Active Manager Plans tend to look expensive when compared to all-Index or ETF plans – Expenses alone do not tell the entire story; return and risk must also be included
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 20
Comparing Active Management vs. Index Management (Risk and Return)
*See “Interpreting Modern Portfolio Theory Statistics” at the end of this publication
COMPOSITION
Asset Class/Style Class FundModerate Allocation Aggressive Allocation
Naïve* Index Fund Naïve* Index Fund
Cash & Equivalent Schwab Stable Value 10% 10% 10% ------ ------ ------
Investment Grade Bonds PIMCO Total Return D 50% 30% 30% 20% 12% 12%
Inflation-Adjusted Bonds PIMCO Real Return Instl ------ 20% 20% ------ 8% 8%
Large Cap Value WHG Large Cap Value Inst ------ 11% 11% ------ 17% 17%
Large Cap Blend S&P 500 IndexSel 40% ------ ------ 80% ------ ------
Large Cap Growth Growth Fund of America R4 ------ 9% 9% ------ 13% 13%
Midcap Value JP Morgan Midcap Value Inst ------ 5% 5% ------ 8% 8%
Midcap Growth Alger Midcap Growth Instl ------ 4% 4% ------ 5% 5%
Small Cap Value Royce Low-Priced Stock ------ 3% 3% ------ 6% 6%
Small Cap Growth Schroeder US Opportunities ------ 2% 2% ------ 4% 4%
Real Estate Third Avenue Real Estate Val ------ 3% 3% ------ 8% 8%
International Equity Amer Funds EuroPac A ------ 3% 3% ------ 14% 14%
Emerging Markets Equity Oppenheimer Dev Markets A ------ ------ ------ ------ 5% 5%
SEVEN YEAR PERFORMANCE** (ending 12/31/2007)
Annualized Return 4.82% 6.65% 7.85% 4.00% 8.42% 10.33%
Alpha vs. Naïve 0.00 1.91 3.40 0.00 4.43 6.49
Beta vs. Naïve 1.00 0.97 0.89 1.00 0.94 0.86
R-Squared vs. Naïve 1.00 0.89 0.83 1.00 0.89 0.84
Standard Deviation 5.04 5.15 4.93 10.43 10.41 9.82
Sharpe Ratio 0.36 0.71 0.99 0.10 0.52 0.75
Tracking Error vs. Naïve 0.00 1.68 2.13 0.00 3.44 4.13
Information Ratio N/A 1.14 1.60 N/A 1.29 1.57
This table shows the seven-year risk and return characteristics for two optimally-constructed portfolios using plan funds. Naïve vs. Index shows the efficiencies of diversification. Index vs. Fund shows the added value (if any) of active management.
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 21
The Future for Plan Fees
Notice Requirements – add 2 new “Notices” to your current list (AE, AI, QDIA, Safe Harbor):
– Annual Fee Notice and Fund Change Notice
Comprehensive Fee Analysis and Benchmarking – by independent third party
Fee Restructuring – pro rata allocation of administration expense; per capita allocation of investment expense
More Competition – 2008 Form 5500 (Schedule C) will disclose all expenses paid by plan (w/o any context, of course)
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 22
Are You Ready for Full Fee Disclosure?
Relate these questions to your retirement plan? Yes NoDon’t Know
1. We have identified those services which are considered necessary to the effective and efficient operation of the plan?
2. We have identified all fees charged for necessary services and confirmed (a) who is currently paying the fee (participant or sponsor) and (b) how the fee is being assessed (pro-rata or per capita)?
3. We have identified all Plan Administration services (and fees) which
are currently paid through plan investments? 4. We offer less expensive share classes today (if possible) than we did
three years ago? 5. We have re-negotiated our plan fees (or moved our business) within
the past three years? 6. We have benchmarked our plan services and fees to similar plans in
the past three years? 7. Total plan expenses are reported to plan fiduciaries at least once
each year? 8. An independent investment advisor, who is a fiduciary of the plan,
regularly reviews our plan’s services, investments and fees? ERISA § 406(a)/408(b)…
“Prohibited transaction occurs if plan assets are used to pay service providers more than reasonable compensation for their services”
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 23
A Fiduciary’s “Fee-Related” To Do List …
Service provider revenue/service assessment
Comparing plan investments and plan costs to correct benchmarks
Share class selection and monitoring
Service provider revenue capitation ($ or bp)
Default fund selection (Who recommended? What were revenue implications?)
Pension plan vs. 401(k) due diligence
Reporting fiduciary actions to Board of DirectorsIf you don’t know what you are doing …
ERISA requires you to find someone who does.
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 24
Thanks for coming!
Michael CrowleyAssociate General CounselNational Futures Association300 South Riverside Plaza Suite 1800Chicago, IL 60606(312) [email protected]
Wayne G. BogosianPresident & Managing DirectorThe PFE Group144 Turnpike Road, Suite 360Southborough, MA 01772(508) 683-1400, ext. [email protected]
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 25
Disclaimers and Attributions
General Notes The information contained in this document is as of December 31, 2007 and is believed to be accurate. Data was gathered from a variety of sources believed to be reliable, including
Morningstar, eVestmentAlliance, Standard & Poor’s and other third-party administrators. Every attempt has been made to verify data; however, no guarantees or endorsements of accuracy are to be made. Any discrepancies between the numbers contained herein and other sources are unintentional.
Total returns include changes in share values and reinvestment of dividends and capital gains distributions, if any. Gross returns will be reduced by management fees and other expenses in an amount proportional to performance. For example, a fund with a gross return of 10% and an expense ratio of 1% will experience a reduction of 1.1%. Individual client performance numbers may differ from reported numbers for a fund due to contributions or withdrawals made during the performance measurement period. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
All references to Company Plans reflect information that was available at the time of publication. Actual benefits will be based upon information and formulas contained in the appropriate Plan Document(s). The inclusion of non-plan funds in certain exhibits is for comparative purposes only, and does not imply an endorsement of those funds by PFE Advisors, Inc.
The information on specific investments contained in this document is not an offer to sell, nor a solicitation of an offer to buy, these securities. Plan sponsors should review fund prospectuses and other relevant information before making any investment decisions.
This presentation is for the exclusive use of PFE Advisors, Inc. and its respective clients, and is not authorized for public distribution.
Index Definitions The S&P 500 is an unmanaged index of 500 large-cap domestic stocks that is commonly used as a proxy for the large-cap stock market. Historically, the index has targeted a
composition of 400 industrial companies, 40 financial companies, 40 utility companies, and 20 transportation companies. The index does not contain real estate investment trusts. Changes in the index composition may be made at any time. Performance numbers for the index are a size-weighted average of the performance numbers for each index constituent.
The Russell 2000 is an unmanaged index consisting of the smallest 2000 stocks in the Russell 3000 universe, which in itself consists of the largest 3000 publicly-traded domestic companies. This index is commonly used as a proxy for the liquid small-cap stock market. The index is reconstructed on July 1 of each year. Performance numbers for the index are a size-weighted average of the performance numbers for each index constituent.
The MSCI EAFE® Index (Europe, Australasia, Far East) is a free float-adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure developed market equity performance, excluding the US & Canada. The index consists of the following 21 developed market country indices: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.
The NAREIT index is an unmanaged index of securities that meet the definition of Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) and are traded on the NYSE, AMEX, or NASDAQ. REITs are investments in rental properties, and are required to pay out 95% of their earnings each year as dividends. Performance numbers for the index are a size-weighted average of the performance numbers for each index constituent.
The Lehman Aggregate Bond Index is an unmanaged index made up of the following fixed-income securities: all debt securities issues to the public by the US Government or its agencies, as well as quasi-federal corporations or corporate debt guaranteed by the US Government; all public obligations of the US Treasury except flower bonds and foreign-targeted issues; all 15-year and 30-year fixed-rate securities backed by mortgage pools of GNMA, FHLMC, and FNMA, with the exception of graduated payment mortgages, manufactured home mortgages, and graduated equity mortgages; and all publicly-issued, fixed-rate, non-convertible, investment-grade, dollar-denominated, SEC-registered corporate debt securities with at least one year to maturity and an outstanding par value of at least $100 million.
401(k) Plan Fees … How Does Your Plan Compare? | | 26
Interpreting Modern Portfolio Theory Statistics
Annualized Return – the constant one-year rate of return on an investment which would result in the same total return as the actual annual returns over the performance period being measured. Example: A three-year investment has three yearly returns of +5%, -4%, and +10%, for a total return of +10.9%. The annualized return on this investment is +3.5%, since a return of 3.5% for each of the three years would result in the same total return of +10.9% with compounding.
Alpha – the expected return of the actively managed portfolio when the return of the index is 0%; it is determined by comparing the monthly or quarterly returns of the portfolio and the index over a period of time. A positive alpha is always good, although it is not abnormal to have a low alpha accompanied by a high beta (see beta below)
Beta – a measure of the market-related risk of a portfolio, expressed as a multiple of its benchmark. A beta of 1.10 means that the portfolio is 10% riskier than its benchmark; a beta of 0.90 means that the portfolio is 10% less risky than its benchmark. Modern Portfolio Theory states that higher betas should be rewarded with proportionally higher returns over long investment periods.
R-Squared (R2) – a measure of the effectiveness of the alpha and beta statistics in estimating the expected risk and return levels of a portfolio. As a rule of thumb, an R2 statistic of 0.70 or higher means that there is a significant relationship between the performance of the portfolio and the performance of the index to which it is being compared. Lower numbers are acceptable if the measurement period is longer, and vice-versa
Standard Deviation – a measure of the consistency of periodic returns of a portfolio or index over time. For any given twelve-month period, the investment has a 68% probability of producing a return within the range defined by its long-term average return plus or minus its standard deviation. Similarly, it has a 95% chance of providing a return in the range defined by its long-term average return plus or minus two standard deviations.
Sharpe Ratio – a measure of the tradeoff between the value added through active management of a portfolio and the amount of risk incurred through the management process. There is no constant number that is considered “good” or “bad”; the only objective for an actively managed portfolio is to produce a Sharpe Ratio that is higher than its benchmark. The Sharpe Ratio uses standard deviation as its measure of risk. (Note: The Sharpe Ratio statistic has a slight bias in favor of more conservative portfolios.)
Tracking Error – A measure of the similarity between the periodic returns of a portfolio and its benchmark. A low tracking error indicates a high degree of similarity, and vice-versa. Like the standard deviation statistic, the interpretation of tracking error is that a portfolio has a 68% probability of performing in a range defined by its benchmark return plus or minus its tracking error over any twelve-month period. There is no “good” or “bad” tracking error – it is simply a reflection of the investment policy of the portfolio manager.
Information Ratio – a comparable measure to the Sharpe Ratio in that it measures the tradeoff between return and risk; however, the return used is the alpha, and the measure of risk is the tracking error.