The Retirement Lifeguard

The Retirement Lifeguard

After reading one of my recent posts, a good friend paradoxically asked “What’s a pension anyway?” And his point is well taken – millions of Americans don’t have a traditional defined benefit pension plan or even a defined contribution plan. So how are they going to accumulate enough assets to retire and just how much money will they need to save for retirement?

It seems to me that the average worker is in need of a “Retirement Lifeguard”to help them develop and plan their retirement savings program. Fortunately, Stephen C. Sexauer and Laurence B. Siegel commendably address this issue in their article entitled “A Pension Promise to Oneself” which appeared in theFinancial Analysts Journal, Volume 69 · Number 6 ©2013 CFA Institute: 13-32.

Sexauer and Siegal assuage numerous concerns by saying, Don’t have a pension? Don’t worry. Most people don’t. They will get to retire, and so will you(13). And then the authors go on to provide a clear, simple framework for thinking about retirement planning issues and offer a basic “toolkit” to help you get started.

What is “A Pension Promise to Oneself?”

The basic function of any pension or savings plan is to shift consumption over time. In other words, how do you save enough during 45 working years (e.g. ages 20 to 65) to make it last for another 20 to 40 years of retirement? Simply put, one must first accumulate assets by forgoing consumption during the working years and then decumulate the assets, enabling consumption, in retirement. And you may consume what you saved plus (or minus) investment returns (14). Sexauer and Siegal contend that, “with or without your employer’s assistance, you have the ability to make “A Pension Promise to Oneself” and deliver on that promise by making pension payments to yourself from the moment you retire until the end of your life or your spouses life, whichever comes later” (13).

The Personal Pension Plan

In order to create your own Personal Pension Plan the authors outline three basic steps and include examples for a typical high school teacher and sanitation worker given the assumption of “minimum risk investing” which we will discuss later. Here are the 3 basic steps:

(1) Estimate how much annual income you will need during retirement.

For starters, Sexauer and Siegal indicate that this step can be as easy as using a simple rule of thumb like 70% of your pre-retirement income (16). However, I also like to use a “bottoms up” approach by developing an estimated budget of expected future expenses. In this regard, I’d recommend using the U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), booklet entitled “Taking the Mystery out of Retirement Planning” which provides a set of easy-to-complete templates.

Then, the authors subtract expected Social Security payments to determine the yearly amount the investor will need to generate from personal savings in retirement. By the way, you can get an estimate of your Social Security benefits by using the Retirement Estimator on the official Social Security website (

(2) Calculate the “retirement multiple” or total amount of savings to accumulate.

Now the fun part. Sexauer and Siegel reduce the retirement calculation down to a multiplication problem that even a fifth grader can solve (18)! The retirement multiple (RM) is the number of years of income you need to save in order to retire while investing risklessly (or as close to risklessly as markets allow), where “income” is not your current pay but the cash flow you need to generate, over and above Social Security benefits, in retirement. (17) For example, at current market rates, the authors conclude that the retirement multiple RM is 21.47x. So if you need to generate $50,000 per year in retirement then you need to have 21.47 times that amount in assets or $1,073,000 ($50,000 X 21.47 = $1,073,000). (17) {Technical note: The RM is the reciprocal of the DCDB yield: 1 / 4.657% = 21.47 and you can find the DCDB yield at (18)}

Here’s where the authors’ examples really help to illustrate the methodology.

As shown in Table 1, Sexauer and Siegel (19) project the final (40th year) salary of a Columbus High School Teacher as $79,904 as highlighted in yellow below.


Then, using the 70% retirement income rule-of-thumb discussed earlier, the authors’ determine that the teacher will need $55,933 per year of income in retirement (Line A). Next, deduct expected Social Security Payments of $24,912 per year and we can see that the teacher will need $31,021 (Line C) per year from his/her “Personal Pension Plan.” Finally, by applying the retirement multiple (RM) of 21.47 to this amount we see that the teacher will need to accumulate $666,111 in order to retire (Line E) (19).

(3) Determine the savings rates necessary to accumulate the assets.

The final step is to determine the annual savings rates, and dollar amounts of annual income, that should be saved and invested in minimum-risk investments in order to accumulate $666,419 by the retirement date. In this regard, the authors present a spreadsheet of data for the Columbus High School teacher example that illustrates the assumed growth rates in earnings and annual savings levels necessary to achieve the goal. I’ve illustrated this data in graphical form below. Graph 1, shows that the teacher’s asset accumulation plan successfully achieves $666,419 in accumulated savings after 40 years.

Graph 1: Asset Accumulation Plan


Graph 2, below, provides a closer look at the projected annual income levels and the percentage of income that needs to be saved each year (Annual Savings Rate %) over forty years. Does the percentage of annual income that needs to be saved surprise you? (10% in year 1, 28% in year 20 and 32% in year 40)?

Spoiler Alert: Saving for retirement requires saving a large proportion of your income! “Like dieting, it’s simple to understand but not easy to do (16).”

Graph 2: Annual Income and Annual Savings Rates (%)

In this example, Sexauer and Siegel are conservative in using today’s real risk free rate of return of zero on Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS). However, the point is to develop a base case where the investor can guarantee the results and that’s why the “risk minimizing investment” approach is used. In practice, many investors try to reduce the savings burden by taking on “shortfall risk” (the risk of not achieving the asset accumulation goal) by investing in riskier assets like equities with the promise of higher returns. But remember this warning, if the increased risk does not pay off then the investor will ultimately increase the savings burden rather than reduce it (21). And remember, investing in risky assets does not change the retirement multiple or the savings goal one needs to achieve (23).

Sounds simple. Are we done yet?

Not so fast. The truth is that real life is much more complicated than a few simple tables or graphs can depict. As Yogi Berra once said, “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.”

Importantly, Sexauer and Siegel include a thorough discussion about the “adaptive behavior” that’s also required to keep your “Personal Pension Plan” on track. The authors explain that it’s important to make “Personal Fiscal Adjustments” (PFAs) when favorable or unfavorable surprises occur on either side of your balance sheet. These adjustments include increasing or decreasing consumption levels or the production of income. This is really a natural process and people make these types of adaptive changes all the time. For example, parents might move in with their children for a time if necessary. Others might find an opportunity to work full time for a portion of their retirement. The important point is that people can and do make the required adjustments to match needs and resources (15).

Live for Today – Plan for Tomorrow

I really enjoyed Sexauer and Siegel’s pragmatic approach to demystifying the retirement savings problem. They did an outstanding job of simplifying complexity for the average investor and showed that saving for retirement can be done, with limited risk, if you make a simple plan, monitor it and adapt to life’s changing conditions.

I think it’s important to be good stewards of the resources we have and to make sound financial plans for tomorrow. And let’s not forget the bigger picture. Don’t forget to live for today rather than for “retirement.” We aren’t guaranteed tomorrow so live with honesty and integrity, caring for the needs of others and treating others with dignity and respect. It’s much more rewarding to be generous with your time and resources than to build a retirement planning spreadsheet!

Stephen C. Sexauer is the chief investment officer, US multi-asset, at Allianz Global Investors, New York City. Lawrence B. Siegel is the Gary P. Brinson Director of Research at the Research Foundation of CFA Institute, Charlottesville, Virginia.

CFA Society Chicago Book Club:

The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee

Second Machine AgeThe CFA Society Chicago book club met on Oct 20th, 2015 to discuss The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies written by MIT professors Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee.  The book discusses the digital age and how it will impact our global economy.  To start off, the first machine age was attributable to the evolution and invention of the steam engine.  If you viewed an economic graph of human history, you would find relatively stagnant economic growth going back thousands of years until the chart vertically takes off around the late 18th century.  Technology is clearly what has shaped recent human history starting with the steam engine which led to the industrial revolution, internal combustion engine, electricity, and supernormal growth.  Like today, there was significant concern new technologies such as the steam engine would displace millions of workers.  While there were certainly many people that were impacted, people eventually evolved and adapted to the new opportunities that were presented by the invention of the steam engine.  There was a lag, but then a significant rise in employment and growth.  Looking back in history, new technologies have destroyed jobs but have also created new jobs albeit on a lag as people adjust and educate themselves to the newer times.  While it took a couple of decades for the invention of the steam engine to turn into the industrial revolution, the authors see the same evolution happening in the digital age.  While there are many similarities between the industrial revolution and the digital age, the former was about automating physical labor while the later is focusing more on cognitive tasks.

The next major inflection point is upon us due to the major breakthroughs in robotics, artificial intelligence, 3D printing, and the expanding computing power of the smart phone.  Google announced in 2010 that they had successfully created the autonomous car that can navigate on major freeways with the help of sensors, algorithms, and meticulously preprogrammed street mapping technology.  Long after the computer beat the world’s best chess player, Watson came along in 2011 and beat our best Jeopardy players.  More recently in 2014, Microsoft announced that not only could we communicate with anyone in the world for free via Skype, we could also communicate with anyone speaking any language via a real time translation service.  The computing purchasing power has been doubling almost every 18 months and while it is always dangerous to extrapolate, the authors don’t see this trend slowing down any time soon.  As always, there are economic challenges as technology races ahead.  Education and flexibility will continue to be important as new technologies emerge and robotic use continues to advance the global economy.


Upcoming Schedule:

November 17, 2015: No Ordinary Disruption: The Four Global Forces Breaking All the Trends by Richard Dobbs, James Manyika, Jonathan Woetzel

December 15, 2015: Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future by Martin Ford

January 19, 2016: The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public Vs. Private Sector Myths by Mariana Mazzucato

February 16, 2015: TBD

To sign up for a future book club event, please click here:

CFA Society Chicago Book Club:

The New Cold War? Religious Nationalism Confronts the Secular State by Mark Juergensmeyer

The New Cold WarThe United States won the Cold War when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.  Liberal democracy and capitalism reigned supreme; the primary ideological alternative, communism, had proved to be economically and politically unviable.  In 1992, Francis Fukuyama published The End of History and the Last Man, in which he argued that, with the collapse of communism, humanity may have reached the endpoint of its cultural and political evolution.  But history didn’t end, and according to Paul Berman, the euphoria of the moment “led so many people – in the United States, nearly everyone – to underestimate the dangers of the moment.”

The dangers came from an ideology far older and more intractable than communism, and if most scholars underestimated it, Mark Juergensmeyer definitively did not.  In his book The New Cold War? Religious Nationalism Confronts the Secular State, published in 1993, Juergensmeyer identifies the continued dominance of religion in many parts of the world, and how many of these religious worldviews conflict with the secular values of liberal democracy.

Juergensmeyer starts in the Middle East, with the Iranian Revolution of 1979 as his first recent example of religion overthrowing a secular government.  Religion has had influence in many other Middle Eastern countries as well, including Egypt.  Even Israel, essentially a secular state, has constituencies that have called for an explicitly religious state.  For example, the Kach Party has stated that non-Jews have no place in Israel, and have called for the country to be run according to Jewish law.  Some of the Kach Party’s statements about Arabs were eerily similar to Hitler’s statements about Jews.

Juergensmeyer also traces the strength of religion in politics in South and Central Asia, including Sri Lanka, Mongolia, Uzbekistan, and most notably India.  Running a secular government has been a challenge in India given the competing religious factions, including Hindu nationalists (such as the BJP) and Sikh nationalists.  In some instances, this competition has resulted in violence, perhaps reaching is apex in 1984 with Operation Blue Star and its aftermath, in which thousands were killed, including Indira Gandhi, the first female Prime Minister of the country.  Although Sikh and Hindu nationalists strongly disagree about many things, they are united in their opposition to secularism; according to Juergensmeyer, “the Sikh rhetoric is strikingly similar to the language of Hindu nationalists”.

The key question that Juergensmeyer asks at the end of the book is if secular western democracy can be compatible with religious nationalism.  He spotted many challenges in 1993, and the last 22 years have only highlighted the challenges in reconciling these two ideologies.  Perhaps surprisingly, religious nationalism can be very compatible with democracy in many countries, simply because many countries have a homogenous religious population.  If 95% of Iranians are Shi’a Muslims, democracy and theocracy may look very similar in that country.  Indeed, Fareed Zakaria, in his book The Future of Freedom, stressed that often Americans focus too much of promoting democracy, and not enough on promoting liberalism, and then are surprised when liberal values don’t automatically follow from democracy.

And thus the main tension between liberal democracy and religious nationalism comes from the tension between liberalism and theocracy.  Questions about human rights, protection of minorities, and freedom of expression may be answered very differently depending on how societies are structured.  This tension was much discussed in the aftermath of the recent Charlie Hebdo shooting, and highlighted that, however optimistic Juergensmeyer was about reconciling liberal democracy and religious nationalism, there may be intractable differences that continue to cause major problems in our world.


Upcoming Schedule:

October 20, 2015: The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee

November 17, 2015: No Ordinary Disruption: The Four Global Forces Breaking All the Trends by Richard Dobbs, James Manyika, Jonathan Woetzel

December 15, 2015: Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future by Martin Ford

January 19, 2016: The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public Vs. Private Sector Myths by Mariana Mazzucato


To sign up for a future book club event, please click here:

New Risks for Municipal Bond Investors

New Risks for Municipal Bond Investors

Hey! Mom-and-pop retail investors still own about 75% of the municipal bond market (directly or indirectly). They want a stable asset class with relatively few defaults, high credit ratings and interest income that’s tax free at the federal, state and local levels, if possible. In short, they want their father’s Oldsmobile.

Yet, today we’re seeing more stressed municipal credits than ever. Detroit, Michigan, filed for Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection in 2013 and is now the largest municipal bankruptcy filing in U.S. history at $18 billion. In this environment, there are new risks for municipal bond investors to evaluate. So investors should think again and remember the old advertising slogan: This is notyour father’s Oldsmobile—or his municipal bond either!

Public Finance: Key Issues and Red Flags 

To address this timely topic, the CFA Society of Chicago brought a panel of experts together for a program entitled: Uncovering Value and Risks in Stressed Municipal Credits. The panel was moderated by Arlene Bohner, Senior Director U.S. Public Finance, at Fitch Ratings and provided forward-looking insights on how to navigate these uncharted waters.

Bohner opened with a big picture overview of key state credit issues. She noted that U.S. states have broad economies and tax bases with substantial control over spending and raising revenue and this, in turn, generally supports their higher credit ratings. However, most governments made heavy cuts during the ’08-’09 recession and are still challenged by higher labor costs, pension funding deficits and huge infrastructure needs.

Longer-term, Bohner feels states remain significantly exposed to the possibility of federal funding cuts (e.g. Medicaid), although Bohner says, “Fitch believes states would have time to adjust to any significant federal actions.” Even still, Fitch has Connecticut, Illinois, Mississippi, and New Jersey currently on a negative outlook yet feels most state ratings will remain stable. In addition, she notes that steep cuts to vulnerable discretionary programs and/or federal tax code changes could have significant effects on state budgets and economies over time.

At the municipal level, Bohner looks for a number of red flags including:

  • Declining revenue base
  • Declining population and/or school enrollment
  • Increasing unemployment rate, coupled with a declining labor force
  • Relatively high tax burden
  • High and rising fixed cost burden
  • Declining assessed property valuations
  • Large debt issuances for controversial / non-essential projects
  • High levels of variable rate debt or swap obligations (> 15% of total debt)
  • Unusually contentious relationships among officials and/or with the State (including poor relationships between management, labor and taxpayers)
  • Inability to resolve labor disputes
  • Long-term labor contracts with inflexible terms
  • Low pension funding ratios with payments below actuarial required contributions (ARC)
  • Agressive budgeting and/or economic assumptions
  • Weak disclosure practices

Bohner now expects to see increased debt issuance at the municipal level to address deferred maintenance and capital needs. She notes that “pay-go” capital spending, which uses savings or current cash flow to finance projects, was reduced or eliminated by most governments well into the recovery. She also cautions investors about the increasing use of direct bank loans (private placements) for municipal financing due to their lack of transparency.

Forward-looking Municipal Metrics

Richard Ciccarone, President and CEO, Merritt Research Services LLC, reported that most cities experienced net general fund deficits from 2008 through 2010 and this was a reflection of the economic downturn. During this period, as many as 62% of big cities (over 500,000 population) and 58% of all cities reported deficits. But Ciccarone points out that Meredith Whitney’s prediction of billions being lost in the muni bond market didn’t come true and that general fund deficits returned to the 23% to 41% range between 2011 through 2014 (see graph below).

Percent of Cities with a Net General Fund Deficit                                    

 All Cities vs. Biggest Cities (Over 500,000 Population) FY 2006-2014

Source: Merritt Research Services, LLC

But that’s ex post information and investors need effective ex ante tools to guide future investment decisions. Ciccarone says, “in almost all distressed situations the unrestricted net asset ratio is negative.” Ciccarone started using this ratio around 2000 and says it has key predictive capability. As shown below, the ratio compares unrestricted net assets, which are resources considered usable for any purpose (numerator), to governmental activities expenditures, which are outflows of resources recorded on the government-wide financial statements per GASB Statement No. 34 (denominator).

Source: Merritt Research Services, LLC

Like a coverage ratio, this metric illustrates the availability of funds relative to expenditures—so the higher the ratio the better. As shown below, the largest cities (a with population over 500,000) have fallen into negative territory since 2009. Meanwhile, for all of the 2,000 cities in Ciccarone’s study, unrestricted net assets were between 20% to 23% of governmental activities expenditures from 2011 to 2014.

Importantly, we need to look at the government-wide balance sheet rather than the fund accounting statements that ignore long-term liabilities. Remember that governmental fund accounting focuses on the short run. But the government-wide balance sheet will reveal pension obligations, OPEB, debt and contra assets with deficit financing and no assets or revenue supporting them.

In regards to significantly underfunded pension obligations, Ciccarone’s big concern is that they may restrict a municipality’s ability to provide essential services (police, fire, garbage, etc.). He emphasized that Chicago’s actuarially required pension contribution (ARC) was as high as 55% of its general fund expenditures in 2014. That’s more than three times the level of other big cities (with a population over 500,000) as shown below. However, like many big cities, Chicago actually paid in far less to its pension plans than its actuarially required contribution levels.

Pension Requirements for Chicago and Big Cities:                          

Annual (Actuarial) Pension Cost as a % of General Fund                                                             Single Employer Plans only (2007-2014)

 Source: Merritt Research Services, LLC

Watch the Early to Mid-Career Numbers

Ciccarone’s final piece of forward-looking advice is to watch the early (25-29 years) to mid-career (30-34 years, 35-39 years) population numbers. These numbers tend to fall in distressed areas and Ciccarone says we need to watch them closely for Chicago. The charts below illustrate the decline for fallen angelslike Detroit and Puerto Rico. Fortunately, Chicago appears to be holding its own on these metrics and/or increasing in some areas.

Detroit Early to Mid-Career Population Groups                                      

(25-29 Years, 30-34 Years and 35-39 Years)

Source: Merritt Research Services, LLC & Government Census Data

Puerto Rico Early to Mid-Career Population Groups                            

(25-29 Years, 30-34 Years and 35-39 Years)

Source: Merritt Research Services, Inc. & Government Census Data

Chicago Early to Mid-Career Population Groups                                      

(25-29 Years, 30-34 Years and 35-39 Years)

Source: Merritt Research Services, Inc. & Government Census Data

Bankruptcy – Is the stigma is gone?

 Shawn O’Leary, Senior Vice President, Senior Research Analyst at Nuveen Investments is concerned that the stigma associated with default is gone. O’Leary noted that historically there’s been a significant fear of losing access to credit markets during bankruptcy. Yet he points out that  Detroit, Michigan, Jefferson County, Alabama and Stockton, California all refinanced and gained market access after bankruptcy. These cities are among the top five municipal bankruptcies in US history (below).

The 5 Biggest Municipal Bankruptcies in US History 

  1. Detroit, Michigan (2013)                                          $18 billion
  2. Jefferson County, Alabama (2011)                           $4 billion
  3. Orange County, California (1994)                            $2 billion
  4. Stockton, California (2012)                                        $1 billion
  5. San Bernardino County, California (2012)       $500 million

 Source: Forbes/Capital Economics

Ciccarone agrees with O’Leary and feels that in this environment the potential for more bankruptcies is definitely there—especially if policymakers approve additional bankruptcy statues like the one Governor Rauner proposed in Illinois. Today, approximately 24 states have been granted bankruptcy rights by their State legislatures but U.S. Territories, like Peurto Rico, cannot.

Lessons from Detroit

Bill Grady, CFA, Senior Portfolio Manager, Allstate Investments says that the problems in Detroit were brewing for decades. Grady says, “if you didn’t see them coming—shame on you.” After all, Detroit lost 50% of its population over the last 11 years. And looking even further back, it had been consistently losing population since the 1950s. Today, Grady hears even more municipalities talking about using bankruptcy as a negotiating tool.

O’Leary quickly added that people assume “special revenue bonds” will always pay principal and interest. In the case of Detroit, O’Leary was stunned by a federal judge who wanted to transfer his investors’ collateral (on water and sewer lines) out for ten years in order to redirect payments to unsecured creditors ahead of him. Even some attorneys suggested that he really wasn’t a secured creditor because Detroit had billions in unfunded capital expenditures. Ultimately, he says it took the ratings agencies to help force a tender offer by insisting that paying less than what’s due is recognized as a default.

Puerto Rico – Neither Fish nor Fowl

According to Bloomberg’s Michelle Kaske and Martin Braun, at $72 billion, The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico has more debt than any U.S. state government except California and New York and had been borrowing to pay its debts when they came due, until it defaulted on its payments in August 2015 (see Puerto Rico’s Slide, Bloomberg Quick Take 10/22/15). Notably, Puerto Rico’s bonds are exempt from local, state and federal taxes everywhere in the US—which made it easy for the US territory to double its debt in ten years.

O’Leary explains, “the problem with Puerto Rico is that it’s neither fish nor fowl.” O’Leary says it’s not a true sovereign nation (so they can’t go to the International Monetary Fund) and, unlike municipalities, it doesn’t have collective action clauses which would enable bondholders to implement a debt restructuring plan as long as the majority agrees. Rather, it’s like U.S. states that can’t file for bankruptcy. Hence, Puerto Rico can only ask for a settlement and that encourages creditors to holdout during negotiations. Ultimately, O’Leary feels the federal government needs to step in and make a deal happen.

To that end, on October 21st the Obama Administration announced its support for legislation that would grant Puerto Rico Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection, and a legal framework for U.S. Territories to conduct debt restructuring. Only time will tell if Congress will approve such a measure.

Bill Grady wraps up by saying, “hedge funds are controlling billions of dollars in bonds in Puerto Rico so it’s nearly impossible to take a position there without exceptional research capabilities.” In the end, Ciccarone thinks bondholders will probably recover between 40% to 70% of their investment—at typical sovereign default rates—while noting that the Puerto Rico’s 8% bonds have recently been trading in that range.

A Crisis in Illinois?

Illinois currently has an underfunded pension system of over $100 billion and the lowest credit rating of any state. Notably, Fitch lowered its rating on Illinois’ general obligation bonds to BBB- (just three steps above junk status) on October 19th and Moody’s downgraded the GO bonds to Baa1 on Oct 28th. And we shouldn’t forget that the state of Illinois has been operating without a budget since July 1, 2015. Bill Grady says, “Illinois and Chicago have been penalized but haven’t hit money yet.” So he wouldn’t handicap either as buying opportunities at this point saying, “you would need a cast iron stomach.”

Finally, Ciccarone thinks there will probably be a crisis at the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) first, then there’s the potential for a happy ending. Chicago has a $20 billion unfunded pension liability and has serious structural budget gaps. On the bright side, Ciccarone points out that Chicago’s school, city and county taxes are still only half that of New York on a per capita basis. And on October 28th, the Chicago City Council passed a $543 million property tax increase to be phased in over four years which will help maintain police, fire and other city services. But he still thinks there will be a lot more paper sold and people losing money before it gets better.

In closing, I’d simply add that these risks do not mean that we should avoid the municipal bond market. Rather, we should consider the relevant factors and metrics described above to carefully select the right municipal bond issues for our portfolios. When given a choice, choose well!

Distinguished Speaker Series: Kurt Summers

KS Photo (new)On October 1, 2015, Chicago City Treasurer Kurt Summers took time out of his busy schedule to present the latest on city finances to a packed room in Hotel Allegro.  Summers became Chicago’s Treasurer less than a year ago. In this role, he acts as Chicago’s investor, banker, and advocate.  During his presentation Summers discussed financial challenges and opportunities that Chicago faces and outlined plans to make his office more efficient and cost-effective for taxpayers.  He recently presented his first budget for the Office of the City Treasurer, with a goal of reducing taxpayer expense by 30% while doubling revenue.

One source of savings is at the Department of Aviation at O’Hare airport.  The Treasurer’s Office currently manages the Department’s $1.8 billion portfolio and only charges O’Hare $76,000 a year in investment fees.  This low rate effectively means Chicago taxpayers are subsidizing O’Hare’s investment management fees to the tune of approximately $1 million per year.  Summers plans to better align costs by charging O’Hare directly instead of having this cost subsidized by taxpayers.  By implementing similar measures the Treasurer’s Office can be fully funded without incurring taxpayer expense. Summers also aims to eliminate subsides and generate more revenue across the board.

Another recent initiative that Summers undertook was revising the official benchmark for Chicago’s investment portfolio.  Previously, the benchmark was the 90 day Treasury bill, which Summers felt set the bar too low.  His office decided to changed this to a bespoke benchmark to better reflect the risk-return profile of the city’s investments.  His office also instituted minimum credit quality standards for its entire portfolio.  Previously, credit quality standards were only applied to individual securities.  Finally, his office saw that Chicago had been holding an excess of working capital in the operations portfolio; enough capital to last for 2 months, even though GFAO standards only call for holding enough capital to last for 45 days.  Summers’ office responded by creating an operations reserve portfolio with slightly longer duration, which should generate an extra $30 million in revenue per year for the city.

Summers identified pension reform as the biggest financial problem facing the city of Chicago, and he bemoaned the fact that politics and egos can often get in the way of progress.  Even when proposals for pension reform get agreement from all relevant parties, there are still legal challenges, as some of these proposals have been struck down by the courts.  Large pension liabilities pose many problems for the city including reduced funding for schools and potentially higher taxes, which could drive residents away.

Finally, Summers talked about Chicago’s financial education program.  Initially, there were 130 different organizations in Chicago providing financial education with little coordination and no common set of curriculum.  Summers’ office created a financial education network, and the U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has referred to Chicago a “model city” for its approach.  Summers encouraged CFA members to volunteer their time and energy to assist in the program.

Ben Bernanke with Martin Wolf on the Global Financial Crisis

Ben Bernanke, former Federal Reserve Chairman, spoke with Martin Wolf, chief economics commentator and associate editor of the Financial Times, at the historic Chicago Theater about his new book The Courage to Act: A Memoir of the Crisis and its Aftermath. The book is Bernanke’s chance to take on some of his harshest critics and to explain, in great detail, the Federal Reserve’s role in saving the country’s financial system during the Great Recession. Bernanke was appointed chairman of the Federal Reserve in 2006, mere months before the financial system began to unravel. During his hour-long chat with Wolf, Bernanke talked about his childhood, Lehman’s failure, and his inability to refinance his home mortgage last year.

Bernanke grew up in South Carolina, where he and his grandmother often discussed the Great Depression, which he said sparked his interest in economics. He was particularly interested in the monetary policy failures of the Great Depression and how future crises could be handled without these mistakes. In fact, on Milton Friedman’s 90th birthday, Bernanke promised that he would het let monetary policy fail again.

Wolf pointedly asked about Bernanke’s decision to let Lehman fail. Bernanke contends that he did not let the bank fail; rather it was the only option. First, he points out that they did not miss the housing bubble. He noted that he spoke with then-President George Bush about what would happen if housing prices dropped significantly and they concluded there would be a recession, but it would be manageable. What they hadn’t anticipated was how quickly short-term financing to banks would dry up as the markets got spooked. This, he insisted, was a weakness in the regulations as the system had too much dry tinder.

Turning back to Lehman, Bernanke detailed the “Lehman weekend” which started with widespread calls from the financial media to let Lehman fail. He wanted to avoid this and hoped another bank would step in to purchase Lehman as JP Morgan had done with Bear Sterns. Two potential buyers stepped forward, Bank of America and Barclays, but after examining Lehman’s balance sheet, both declined. The next option was for the Fed to lend money to Lehman (as it did later with AIG), but Lehman had no good collateral against which it could borrow. In the end, Bernanke contends he had no choice and Lehman failed.Bernanke leaves fed

The mood lightened a bit during the audience Q & A, when Bernanke was asked about the lack of mortgage credit in the market today and whether he thought it had gone from too loose to too tight. Bernanke agreed and told of how he was prevented from refinancing his home because he no longer worked for the Federal Reserve and didn’t meet the bank’s minimum number of years of self-employment. Don’t worry, though, as soon as the media got wind of it, Bernanke was offered plenty of refinancing opportunities from other banks.

Distinguished Speaker Series: Dmitry Balyasny

Dmitry Balyasny, Managing Partner and Chief Investment Officer, provided an outline of his firm, Balyasny Asset Management (BAM), as well as thoughts on how a well-functioning hedge fund should be structured at a luncheon presentation hosted by CFA Society Chicago on September 10th, 2015.

Balyasny provided a summary of how he got his start in the business; beginning with trading short-term equity and futures, and later in a fund of funds analyst role. After a number of years of trading and fundamental analysis under his belt, Balyasny set up BAM in 2001. He happily advised BAM Atlas Global fund has never had a negative return since its inception (2002) and also noted that Atlas Global has a correlation with the S&P 500 since inception of .04.

Balyasny provided several tips on what it takes to build a good hedge fund complex, from returns to the overall culture, and include the following:

  1. Ensure that you have a low correlation index – Balyasny Dmitry headshot with tie 1consistently looks for uncorrelated managers; people that are doing different things (that add Sharpe).
  1. Promote a collaborative, partnership culture, and attract and retain talent through a culture of excellence.

According to Balyasny a good hedge fund is small to medium in size and has robust risk management separate from portfolio management, emphasizing sector specialization, and dynamic capital allocation.

How does BAM produce for their clients? Their source of alpha is primarily drawn from ideas – bottom up bets (big bets do not work). BAM generates alpha primarily from ideas, 87%, while sizing of the bet only accounts for 13% of alpha. Thus it is critical to have numerous good ideas.

Balyasny also noted that since the market is mostly efficient, alpha is typically acquired over a short period of time. Approximately 70% of BAM’s alpha is generated within four months of purchase; 44% in less than one month, and 26% in one to three months. Thus BAM turns over their portfolios frequently in an effort to generate alpha. The BAM model focuses on the short-term as they believe it is difficult to look out years into the future and have expectations hold.

Balyasny finished the discussion by answering several questions including an interesting question regarding fee compression in the hedge fund market. Balyasny thought it strange that nearly all hedge fund products are priced the same, the 2 and 20 model. “Either they are too expensive, they are not providing alpha, or they are too cheap.” Balyasny noted that BAM’s pricing structure pushes past the 2 and 20 to a higher level because of their delivery of alpha and in an effort to remain small.

State of the Unions: The EU and the US in the 21st Century

On September 9th, The Chicago Council on Global Affairs and CFA Society Chicago partnered together to welcome Mr. Van Overtveldt, Minister of Finance of Belgium since 2014.  He is an economist, journalist and writer based in Brussels. He has authored several books including, The End of the Euro, Bernanke’s Test and The Chicago School and is a contributor to the Wall Street Journal and other publications.  His presentation revolved around the topic of his new book, A Giant Reborn: Why the US Will Dominate the 21st Century.

Mr. Van Overtveldt began his presentation by referencing literature and writers, who from 1775 through 1965 had predicted the decline of America.  These people had failed to recognize the reasons why America came to dominate and why it will continue to dominate world affairs in the 21st century.  Mr. Van Overtveldt uses an economic based argument of American superiority based on three factors:

  • Human Capital and Knowledge (non-excludable and non-exhaustible)
  • Entrepreneurial Drive (favored in the US economy)
  • Globalization

The above factors have created the environment of what Mr. Van Overtveldt describes as “turbo-change” that thrives in America.  Other countries cannot cope with change the way Americans have demonstrated they can.  Change is part of America’s DNA.

Mr. Van Overtveldt then focused on why Europe and China will not challenge America in the foreseeable future, describing China as having the biggest economic bubble the world has ever seen.  The “Confucian Deal” of the Party guaranteeing jobs and higher wages in exchange for little or no freedom will not work.  In China, debt as a percentage of GDP has doubled since 2008 and overcapacity in real estate is demonstrated by vacant houses and apartments.  China is also surrounded by potential enemies such as Vietnam and Japan.

The European Union has really not achieved a union, since European countries have demonstrated that they will not yield their sovereignty.  Mr. Van Overtveldt argues that the French and German coalition that ran the European Union will no longer work as France’s economy has not been able to keep up with the German economy.

In the Q&A that followed the presentation, Mr. Van Overtveldt stated that the UK has a large influence on the European Union and that its vote to remain in the EU will be closely watched.  The UK’s influence is especially large in Germany.  He also briefly commented on the immigration crisis in Europe, stating that there is no mechanism to arrive at a consensus on this issue.

Mr. Van Overtveldt also demonstrated the effectiveness of the US constitution versus the ineffectiveness of the European Union by comparing the Greek and California bankruptcies. California was able to get money from Washington if it met certain conditions.  The Greeks were given certain conditions; however there was no legal right to enforce these conditions.  The EU had no legal right to dictate reforms as they had to be approved by the Greeks themselves.

Thrown for a Loop Scavenger Hunt

CFA Society Chicago has an established history of working to promote thoughtful analysis and prudent decision making among its members. But how adept would its members be at navigating and scrutinizing the very city they live and work in every day? On August 27th about thirty CFA Society Chicago members sought to prove their analytical skill outside the office at the Thrown for a Loop Scavenger Hunt. The event was organized by the CFA Social Advisory Group and conducted by Watson Adventures, a vendor who specializes in conducting scavenger hunts and has a footprint in several major cities.

Watson Adventures’ hunts are not scavenger hunts in the traditional sense in which participants locate and collect items based on clues, but are instead information-based scavenger hunts. Participants receive lists of hints prompting them to visit certain locations, examine details about those places, and answer cryptically-worded questions. As the name of the event suggests, the location for the CFA Chicago hunt was the entire Chicago Loop and the buildings and landmarks within the area. After assembling at Daley Plaza, participants were divided into teams of four or five by the Watson staff and sent out into the Loop with their question lists to begin hunting. The questions led members through sites such as the Chicago Cultural Center, Millennium Park, and City Hall. Sites that members might pass by on their daily commute became objects of detailed investigation as teams searched for correct answers. Watson Adventures protects the details of its hunts closely, rightly treating them like intellectual property, so we’re not at liberty to provide too many details here. But just to give a sense of the detail involved: how familiar are you with the gargoyles on the facade of the University Club?


Winning Team!

The Watson Adventures staff had also prepared some bonus tasks specifically for CFA Society Chicago that gave participants extra points for their scavenger hunt team score. In one task, participants got extra points for taking a photo of their team acting out “Community,” one of the five CFA Society Chicago organizational pillars. In another task, teams had to take a picture of themselves standing in front of a financial institution’s signage while pretending to flash trading pit signals. Scores between the participating teams were incredibly close, so bashful teams ignored these optional tasks at their own peril.

After an hour and a half of hunting, teams reassembled at Daley Plaza where Watson Adventures staff collected answer sheets and added up the scores. The winning team consisting of Mark Cichra, Caroline Frensko, Casey Hatch, and April Heitz, won by only a single point. CFA Society Chicago members thanked the Watson staff and expressed gratitude to each other for the team-building and camaraderie. Afterwards, participants gathered at nearby Randolph Tavern for drinks and conversation.

For more information about upcoming events organized by the CFA Social Advisory Group, check the Events page on the CFA Society Chicago website.

CFA Society Chicago Book Club:

SUPERPOWER: Three Choices for America’s Role in the World by Ian Bremmer

In a recent talk Ian Bremmer explained why he wrote this book now, an endeavor he had not contemplated in prior years stating “I think it is extremely important for all Americans to discuss our country’s role in the world, its choices, and make it a large part of the upcoming election.”    Bremmer feels that the United States is at a crossroads in its foreign policy, wandering between multiple ideologies which has weakened its position and left our allies and foes wondering what, if any commitments the USA is prepared to support.  As a guide Bremmer offers our future President three choices: Indispensable America, Money America and Independent America.  Each is expanded upon and discussed in the main body of the book after a brief synopsis of the current and recent history of the world’s foreign relations and America’s involvement.

Bremmer begins by giving a general outline of questions for the reader to consider as one weighs the three options and includes the topics: Freedom is? America is? China is? America’s biggest problem in the Middle East is? What are the USA’s spy capabilities? What are the risks? What is the primary responsibility of the president? What should America look like in 2050?  He uses this outline to help readers shape their own views and then benchmark those views against his three options described below:

  • Indispensable America: “Argues that only America can define the values on which global stability increasingly depends.  In today’s interdependent, hyperconnected world, a turn inward would undermine America’s own security and prosperity.  We will never live in a stable world while others are denied their most basic freedoms – from China to Russia to the Middle East and beyond.”  Since America is the only country that is capable of utilizing its vast resources to underwrite global security and support a general prosperity, it is our duty to help all democratic minded people who support human rights through military campaigns globally.  It is through our defense of our values that we can accomplish a peaceful world, and any retreat would subject millions (if not billions) of individuals to pain and suffering under the hands of maniacal dictators and cultures bent on domination and control.  It is America’s duty to free the world, and we as a nation must not only project strength but use our strength as needed.  This option calls for an expansion of military and economic aid throughout the world.  Pulling back fails to recognize the interconnectedness of the world, and America’s need for a stable world for economic growth.
  • Moneyball America:  This option “acknowledges that Washington cannot meet every international challenge.  With clear-eyed assessment of USA strengths and limitations, we must look beyond empty arguments over exceptionalism and American values.  The priorities must be to focus on opportunities and to defend U.S. interests where they are threatened.”  This option states that the U.S cannot be everywhere and do everything globally.  The next president will have to weigh each challenge, doing a cost benefit analysis on America’s role and decide which areas are worth America’s involvement and which are situations where the U.S. is simply overspending for the return received by both America and the world.  In order to do this correctly, a well thought out and consistent message and action plan must be accomplished.  If the U.S. is not clear when it will get involved and when it will not, the world will be left in confusion as to our intentions and commitments.
  • Independent America: This option “asserts that it is time for America to declare independence from the responsibility to solve other people’s problems.  Instead, Americans should lead by example – in part by investing in the country’s vast untapped potential.”  This argument is based on the belief that America’s history of foreign involvement recently has not benefited the world, and has left our own country in decay.  This option allows for a massive decrease in military and foreign aid that should be invested in America through: rebuilding our public infrastructure, investing in American education, increasing our care to our brave veterans, decreasing taxes, and getting our own financial position under control.  Bremmer recognizes this cannot be done immediately, but should be done gradually so as our allies can prepare their own defenses to face future challenges.  The next president should send a clear message that we are going independent and that the world will need to take a much bigger role in helping the oppressed and realize the U.S. is not going to be the policeman of the world into the future.

Bremmer leads the reader through the three choices, and offers a fourth which is “Question Mark America” which he totally dismisses.  This is the America which we are, going back and forth between the three options mattering on political polls and global sentiment.  He openly criticizes our current and near history policies, and calls for a clear solution and hopes that all Americans will force the presidential candidates to be coherent and specific on their foreign policy in the upcoming election.

The author does choose an option and defends his position – we will not disclose the final chapters so as not to spoil the ending.  However the strength of the book is not Bremmer’s own conclusion but that it is well constructed for all readers to really contemplate the current policy, the options and reach one’s own conclusion.  Many members began with one view but were slowly swayed one way or the other as they read this thoughtful treatise, remarking that the book contained many compelling and thought provoking ideas.

As a group we felt the book was an accurate snapshot of world events, and provided an excellent event synthesis on recent historical events.   Although a few indicated they began as a supporter of Indispensable America, after reading the arguments however, the group mainly felt the rest of the world needed to provide further global support and the U.S. was carrying too much of the burden.  In general it was felt that the world needed to step up their involvement in global policies and they needed to be more independent in their own defense structures.  We discussed in detail what we felt were the three major “hotspots” of the world namely the Middle East, Korean Peninsular and Eastern Europe.  Although we concluded it was impossible to serve as policeman to the entire world, the group in general thought it would be too dangerous to completely remove our commitments to these three areas.  Thus, the group in general thought Moneyball was the ultimate solution, although many agreed that the U.S. was not very good at deciding on the fly which was the best time and place for engagement.  In order for Moneyball to work a deep discussion is needed by our political structure to set up clear and decisive guidelines so our allies are fully aware of our intentions.  We also recognized the limitations to this strategy given the changing and dysfunctional environment in Washington at the present time.

There was also support for Independent America, given a long lead time for our Allies to “step up” their capabilities, but most thought the world would become too dangerous if we pulled back entirely and the ultimate result would provide a greater instability to world economic and political order.  We also discussed the fact that there may be alternatives to these three options including the idea presented to pull back but give implicit assumption guarantees to several of our allies in the crossfire such as South Korea, Baltic States and Israel.  Many also felt that pulling back was a hard decision when so many are suffering; can America sit by while many die to ruthless, uncivilized factions?  Simply withdrawing may be too repugnant for many, but who is willing to send their sons and daughters to sacrifice for these countries?  The question is difficult and the answer more so, but these are the thoughts of the reader who chooses to engage in Ian Bremmer’s world.

Lastly, it was noted that one entity was glaringly omitted from the book (although one brief mention did occur but was minor) – the United Nations.


Upcoming Schedule:


September 15, 2015: The New Cold War? Religious Nationalism Confronts the Secular State by Mark Juergensmeyer

October 20, 2015: The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee

November 17, 2015: No Ordinary Disruption: The Four Global Forces Breaking All the Trends by Richard Dobbs, James Manyika, Jonathan Woetzel

December 15, 2015: TBD



To sign up for a future book club event, please click here: