Carl Karl, a portfolio manager for the Alpine Trust Company, has been responsible since 2015 for the
Question:
The plan board of trustees directed Karl 5 years ago to invest for total return over the long term. However, as trustees of this highly visible public fund, they cautioned him that volatile or erratic results could cause them embarrassment. They also noted a state statute that mandated that not more than 25% of the plans assets (at cost) be invested in common stocks.
At the annual meeting of the trustees in November 2020, Karl presented the following portfolio and performance report to the board:
Karl was proud of his performance and was chagrined when a trustee made the following critical observations:
a. Our 1-year results were terrible, and its what youve done for us lately that counts most.
b. Our total fund performance was clearly inferior compared to the large sample of other pension funds for the last 5 years. What else could this reflect except poor management judgment?
c. Our common stock performance was especially poor for the 5-year period.
d. Why bother to compare your returns to the return from Treasury bills and the actuarial assumption rate? What your competition could have earned for us or how we would have fared if invested in a passive index (which doesnt charge a fee) are the only relevant measures of performance.
e. Who cares about time-weighted return? If it cant pay pensions, what good is it! Appraise the merits of each of these statements and give counterarguments that Mr. Karl canuse.
Step by Step Answer: