A Review of Norges Bank's Active Management of the Government Pension Fund Global

Magnus Dahlquist, B. A. Ødegaard
{"title":"A Review of Norges Bank's Active Management of the Government Pension Fund Global","authors":"Magnus Dahlquist, B. A. Ødegaard","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3114175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We have reviewed Norges Bank’s active management of the Government Pension Fund Global, referred to simply as the “Fund.” \nThe absolute performance of the Fund is almost entirely determined by the benchmark choice set by the Ministry of Finance (the asset owner) and is dominated by equity risk. In this sense, the Fund can be viewed as a mega index fund. However, the Fund also deviates from its benchmark and pursues active management. These deviations stem from various investment strategies, such as factor investing, internal and external security selection, trading strategies based on opportunities arising from market imperfections and liquidity provisioning, and real estate investments. In this sense, the Fund can be viewed as akin to a mega index fund, enhanced by its active management. \nThe relative performance of the Fund (i.e., the return difference between the Fund and its benchmark, also referred to as the active return) is 0.20% per year after costs. In terms of the Fund’s value added after costs, this corresponds to a transfer to the asset owner (and ultimately the Norwegian people) of NOK 30–50 billion over the 2013–2017 period, depending on how we adjust and credit risk taking. The lion’s share of the value added comes from the Fund’s equity portfolio. While it is difficult for us to assess each strategy’s contribution to the Fund’s total performance, a return decomposition suggests that the mean active return is due to security selection rather than market timing and, in particular, that the Fund has been able to choose outperforming external managers that contribute substantially. We also find that activities related to the indexing (e.g., asset positioning and securities lending) contribute to the total return, mitigating the Fund’s costs of passively managing the assets. \nIn line with our mandate, the executive summary highlights the main findings and concludes with recommendations.","PeriodicalId":187122,"journal":{"name":"Swedish House of Finance Research Paper Series","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Swedish House of Finance Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3114175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

We have reviewed Norges Bank’s active management of the Government Pension Fund Global, referred to simply as the “Fund.” The absolute performance of the Fund is almost entirely determined by the benchmark choice set by the Ministry of Finance (the asset owner) and is dominated by equity risk. In this sense, the Fund can be viewed as a mega index fund. However, the Fund also deviates from its benchmark and pursues active management. These deviations stem from various investment strategies, such as factor investing, internal and external security selection, trading strategies based on opportunities arising from market imperfections and liquidity provisioning, and real estate investments. In this sense, the Fund can be viewed as akin to a mega index fund, enhanced by its active management. The relative performance of the Fund (i.e., the return difference between the Fund and its benchmark, also referred to as the active return) is 0.20% per year after costs. In terms of the Fund’s value added after costs, this corresponds to a transfer to the asset owner (and ultimately the Norwegian people) of NOK 30–50 billion over the 2013–2017 period, depending on how we adjust and credit risk taking. The lion’s share of the value added comes from the Fund’s equity portfolio. While it is difficult for us to assess each strategy’s contribution to the Fund’s total performance, a return decomposition suggests that the mean active return is due to security selection rather than market timing and, in particular, that the Fund has been able to choose outperforming external managers that contribute substantially. We also find that activities related to the indexing (e.g., asset positioning and securities lending) contribute to the total return, mitigating the Fund’s costs of passively managing the assets. In line with our mandate, the executive summary highlights the main findings and concludes with recommendations.
挪威央行对政府养老基金的积极管理述评
我们回顾了挪威央行对全球政府养老基金(简称“基金”)的积极管理。基金的绝对业绩几乎完全由财政部(资产所有者)设定的基准选择决定,并以股票风险为主。从这个意义上说,该基金可以被视为一个大型指数基金。然而,该基金也偏离其基准,追求积极的管理。这些偏差源于各种投资策略,如要素投资、内部和外部证券选择、基于市场不完善和流动性供应带来的机会的交易策略以及房地产投资。从这个意义上讲,该基金可以被视为类似于一只大型指数基金,并因其积极的管理而得到加强。本基金的相对表现(即本基金与其基准之间的收益差,也称为主动收益)扣除成本后每年为0.20%。就基金扣除成本后的增加值而言,这相当于在2013-2017年期间向资产所有者(最终是挪威人民)转移300 - 500亿挪威克朗,具体取决于我们如何调整和信用风险承担。增值的大部分来自该基金的股票投资组合。虽然我们很难评估每种策略对基金总业绩的贡献,但回报分解表明,平均主动回报是由于证券选择而不是市场时机,特别是基金能够选择表现出色的外部经理,这些经理贡献很大。我们还发现,与指数相关的活动(例如,资产定位和证券借贷)有助于总回报,减轻基金被动管理资产的成本。根据我们的任务规定,执行摘要突出了主要调查结果,并提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信