Archives: Articles

IssueM Articles

Send in the Robots (Don’t Bother, They’re Here)

The market for financial planning software is huge, and no wonder. The need among financial advisers for productivity-enhancing tools ensures a steady demand. The vast computing power and algorithmic creativity of techno-geeks generates a steady supply.

Advisers in search of the latest planning software could find a lot of it in one place at Joel Bruckenstein’s and David Drucker’s annual T3–Advisor’s Edition conference and trade show, held last week at the Hilton in sunny, palm-studded Anaheim, Calif.

One takeaway from the conference: FAs who still rely on Excel spreadsheets or scratch pads—and many still do, evidently—will find it hard to compete in a world where everybody has an iPhone or ‘Droid. “You’re in danger of falling behind your own clients,” warned one presenter.  

Undisputably. But of the dozens of products available, which should an adviser choose? If income distribution is your game, a product with strong distribution capabilities is a must. Unfortunately, distribution wasn’t a strong theme at T3—but it wasn’t absent.   

In this article, rather than explore the distribution-related features of products from the better-known exhibitors at T3—MoneyGuidePro, Advisor Software Inc., and Advicent (NaviPlan), for example—in this article I’ll focus on my visits to the booths of three smaller outfits whose products were new to me: RetireUp, AskTRAK, and Riskalyze.    

RetireUp. As its name implies, this may have been the only firm at T3 that clearly positions its product as a decumulation tool. Created by LPL Chairman’s Council advisor Jeff Feinendegen and physicist/songwriter Dan Santner, this program aims at replacing time-intensive retirement plans with a process that advisers and their clients can complete “in minutes.”    

The demo on the RetireUp website (a 14-day free trial is offered) walks you through a multi-step process that starts with the creation of a client Profile, proceeds to an analysis of “Assets,” “Liabilities,” and Custom Goals, and ends with the creation and presentation of a Retirement Plan.

RetireUp graphicOne of the demos involved a fictional couple named Brian (age 55) and Michelle (age 56). They hoped to generate an after-tax retirement income in about 10 years of $80,000 (with an annual 2.5% inflation adjustment and survivor’s income of $60,000).

Their assets included Brian’s 401(k) (currently $750,000; projected to be $1.22 million at retirement) and their joint savings ($300,000; $403,000 at retirement). At full retirement age, they’d get about $38,000 from Social Security, and Brian had a $12,000-a-year pension with a 50% spousal benefit.

Probably to keep the example simple, the Brian and Michelle were blessed with no liabilities and their only “Custom Goals” were the anticipated expense of their five-year-old daughter’s wedding ($25,000) and a $5,000 vacation once every three years throughout retirement. Potential college expenses were not listed.

After plugging in these and other numbers, the adviser and client could generate a Retirement Plan page. In the demo, the Plan screen was filled with the inevitable but potentially bewildering rows and columns of numbers, all populated with precise but hypothetical values.

But it wasn’t overwhelming. By toggling back and forth between different spending rates or assumptions about longevity, Brian and Michelle could experiment with various drawdown scenarios that could (or failed to) satisfy their income needs and neutralize their longevity risk exposure.

One of the dashboard indicators on the Plan page was an Income Stability Ratio, which provided a calculation of the percentage of Brian and Michelle’s income that was coming from guaranteed sources such as pensions and Social Security. RetireUp also allows comparisons of variable annuities with living benefits through its “Compare It” function. “We believe our software does a good job of identifying when it is or isn’t appropriate to move into a variable annuity,” said Brian Bossler, RetireUp’s vice president of business development.

AskTRAK. Dallas, Ore.-based Trust Builders, Inc., developed the TRAK planning and education tool (TRAK stands for The Retirement Analysis Kit) largely to help plan sponsor advisers. Defined contribution plan advisors can use it show participants how much to save. In public pensions, it can be used to project future income streams or to coordinate the drawdown of pension and after-tax savings in the most tax-efficient manner. But individual advisers and their clients can evidently use it too.

The AskTRAK toolkit is chock-full of calculators. A Multi-Tiered Split Annuity calculator, for instance, allows advisers to show clients how to split a given lump sum into income from a succession of as many as five tiers of deferred and/or immediate annuities. 

AskTRAK imageIn one strategy that’s illustrated on the AskTRAK website, a newly retired 62-year-old with an after-tax $500,000 lump sum decides to build a three-tiered split annuity. The first tier, which uses $118,300 of the $500,000, provides a $2,300 monthly income until age 67.

Over those five years, a $102,500 piece of the original asset grows (at an assumed rate of 6%) to a projected $137,200, which provides $2,600 a month until age 72. The remaining $279,200 is allowed to grow (at an assumed 6%) for 10 years, reaching a projected $500,000. That amount can be used to buy more income, if needed, or to fund a legacy.    

Like other software, TRAK’s Tax Wise Distribution Strategy can generate the now-familiar Rock of Gibraltar-shaped retirement income chart. But instead of refracting each year’s income into colored bands that correspond to its sources, this chart refracts income into colored bands that correspond to tax brackets.

A client who is drawing down savings from both pre-tax and after-tax accounts, for example, can use this chart as a guide to spending the pre-tax money first (so that it is taxed at the lowest rate) and then relying on after-tax money when income climbs into the higher tax brackets.  

For retirees who anticipate using qualified plan assets for legacy purposes, AskTRAK also has a Stretch IRA calculator. It can illustrate the projected annual withdrawals and the declining value of a 401(k) account as it passes from the original account owner to a surviving spouse and then to children or grandchildren. 

Riskalyze. This specialty software applies Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky’s Nobel Prize-winning “prospect theory” to the task of quantifying a client’s risk tolerance. It aims to replace the traditional risk tolerance questionnaire with a more quantitative and scientific approach.

Every client gets a “Risk Number” from one to 100. Like many risk assessment tools, it’s based on the client’s professed tolerance for loss and desire for gain, along with the his or her “financial devastation” amount—defined by Riskalyze as the amount of paper loss that compels the investor to panic-sell.

Riskalyze image

The Risk Number is presented to the client in the form of a speed limit sign. The greater the risk tolerance, the higher the Risk Number will be. Portfolios are also assigned risk numbers, enabling the adviser to match clients and portfolios with similar scores.

Using the tool, the adviser can also generate a Risk Number for a new client’s existing portfolio, to see how far it varies from the client’s risk tolerance. The Risk Number is only a starting point in terms of portfolio building. Many different combinations of assets might all generate a score of 45, for instance.

“Heat maps” are popular these days, and Riskalyze offers a “risk/reward heat map” of the investments in a client’s portfolio. It allows the adviser and client to see the projected range of a specific asset’s performance over the subsequent six months.

Aside from showing the possible gain and possible loss, the heat map displays how much of each investment’s downside risk is likely to be buffered by the other investments in the portfolio.   

Fans of Kahneman’s 2011 book, “Thinking Fast and Slow,” might be impressed to hear that Riskalyze applies his prospect theory to the task of assessing risk tolerance. A pillar of behavioral finance, this theory has helped describe how people actually weigh and choose between risky alternatives, rather than how a hypothetical “rational investor” might behave.   

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

The Bucket

ING U.S. announces fourth quarter and full year 2013 results

ING U.S., Inc., which will rebrand as Voya Financial, Inc. in 2014, reported fourth quarter 2013 after-tax operating earningsof $198 million, up from $136 million in 4Q’12, and net income available to common shareholders of $548 million, up from a loss of $23 million in 4Q’12.

Full year 2013 after-tax operating earnings were $825 million, compared with $597 million in 2012. Net income available to common shareholders was $601 million, compared with $473 million in 2012.

Fourth quarter 2013 net income available to common shareholders included:

  • Actuarial gains on pension and postretirement benefits, after-tax, of $263 million primarily due to rising interest rates and strong performance of assets in the pension plan.

The Closed Block Variable Annuity (CBVA) segment’s after-tax loss of $147 million, which was driven by an after-tax loss of $177 million related to nonperformance risk. The CBVA segment includes the effect of its hedge program, which focuses on protecting regulatory and rating agency capital from market movements, rather than minimizing GAAP earnings volatility.

Annuities adjusted operating earnings were $56 million, compared with $51 million. The following items primarily accounted for this increase:

  • Lower DAC/VOBA and other intangibles amortization ($5 million positive variance) due to a decrease in the amortization rate;
  • Higher fee based margin ($3 million positive variance) on increased levels of mutual fund custodial assets; and
  • Higher trail commissions ($2 million negative variance) due to increased mutual fund sales and AUM.

Net outflows were $172 million, as lapses on fixed rate annuity policies, especially older products with higher fixed rate crediting levels such as Multi-Year Guarantee Annuities, exceeded new sales.

Retirement business

Retirement adjusted operating earnings were $134 million, compared with $117 million. The following items primarily accounted for this increase:

  • Higher fee based margin ($17 million positive variance) on higher variable assets partially offset by reduced recordkeeping revenue;
  • Higher investment spread and other investment income ($12 million positive variance) stemming largely from higher limited partnership income and prepayment fee income, as well as reduced crediting rates;
  • Higher administrative expenses ($11 million negative variance) partially due to volume-related expenses and ongoing investment in systems infrastructure;
  • An increase in other revenue ($8 million positive variance) related to changes in market value adjustments related to surrendered retirement plans;
  • Higher DAC/VOBA and other intangibles amortization ($5 million negative variance) as a result of higher gross profits, partially offset by a reduced amortization rate; and
  • Higher trail commissions ($4 million negative variance) due to higher AUM.

Retirement net flows were $363 million, compared with $1.8 billion in the fourth quarter of 2012 and $234 million in the third quarter of 2013. (Net flows vary in size and timing, sometimes substantially, from one quarter to the next.) Retirement AUM totaled $105 billion as of December 31, 2013, up from $90 billion as of December 31, 2012 and up from $100 billion as of September 30, 2013.

Annuities segment

AUM for the Annuities segment totaled $27 billion as of December 31, 2013, up slightly from $26 billion as of September 30, 2013 and $26 billion as of December 31, 2012. Included in AUM is the company’s mutual fund custodial product (Select Advantage), which increased to $3.4 billion as of December 31, 2013, up from $3.1 billion as of September 30, 2013 and $2.4 billion as of December 31, 2012.

Closed block variable annuity

Closed Block Variable Annuity had a net loss before income taxes of $226 million, including a loss before income taxes of $272 million due to changes in the fair value of guaranteed benefit derivatives related to nonperformance risk, which the company considers a non-economic factor.

This compares with a fourth quarter 2012 net loss before income taxes of $167 million, which included a loss before income taxes of $401 million related to nonperformance risk.

ING U.S.’s CBVA hedge program is designed primarily to protect regulatory and rating agency capital from equity market movements, rather than minimize GAAP earnings volatility. During the quarter, the hedge program resulted in a net gain to regulatory surplus as a result of the difference between the decline in reserves and the decline in hedge assets related to equity market movements. GAAP earnings were favorably impacted by lower volatility, which offset market appreciation related net hedge program losses.

The retained net amount at risk for CBVA living benefit guarantees improved to $2.2 billion as of December 31, 2013 from $3.0 billion as of September 30, 2013, primarily due to favorable equity and interest market movements.

 

MassMutual announces new seminar series for plan participants  

MassMutual’s Retirement Services Division announced that its RetireSmart interactive participant education series will have a new “lineup” in 2014, its fifth year. The series will include six seminars, each led by an industry expert.

The series opens Feb. 26 with returning guest speaker Dr. Jerry Webman, Ph.D, CFA and Chief Economist for OppenheimerFunds Inc. He will review 2013’s market performance, discuss factors driving the global economy and identify key economic indicators to watch for retirement investors.

The RetireSmart seminar series will continue bi-monthly throughout 2014 as follows:

  • April 9: Retirement Planning for the Ages. Presented by Farnoosh Torabi, independent Generation Y money coach, best-selling author and personal finance journalist.
  • June 11: Strategies for Pre-Retirees. Presented by Black Rock Investments.
  • Aug. 6: The Art of Negotiating a Deal. Presented by Farnoosh Torabi.
  • Oct. (exact date to be announced on www.retiresmartseminars.com): Calculating your Social Security Retirement Benefit. Presented by a representative from the U.S Social Security Administration.
  • Dec. 3: Maximizing your Workplace Benefits. Presented by Farnoosh Torabi.

 

Securian individual variable annuity sales up 57% over 2012

According to a release this week from Securian:

“In 2013, many variable annuity providers adjusted their product portfolios to reduce risk.

“Some even exited the market as low interest rates continued to pose significant risk exposure for lifetime withdrawal benefit guarantees which are included in some variable annuity products.

“Meantime, Securian Financial Group’s diligent risk management positioned the company’s retirement unit to step up with new annuity products as demand rose and competitors stepped back. Additionally, Securian responded to distributors’ requests for less complex annuities that meet the financial needs of many clients.  

“The result? A 57% surge in individual variable annuity sales, to $900 million.

“‘Our goal has never been to dominate the individual annuity market,’ said Dan Kruse, second vice president, Individual Annuity Actuary, Securian Financial Group. ‘Our goal is to create products that meet the needs of our strategic distribution partners and their clients without exceeding Securian’s risk appetite.’

“Bolstering sales growth is a high customer retention rate of 93% among Securian’s individual annuity owners. Customer satisfaction was 98%. Assets under management rose from $6 billion in 2012 to $7 billion in 2013.”

 

New York Life reports record sales growth in 4Q 2013

New York Life has announced “very strong” fourth quarter gains in sales of life insurance, annuities and mutual funds. According to a release, sales of recurring premium life insurance through agents were up 5% and total annuity sales were up 14% over 2012, both representing a new record for 12-month growth rates in those products. 

The fourth quarter growth of recurring premium life insurance products came from the company’s whole life, universal life and variable universal life products. Of the company’s new life insurance sales, 46% was produced by agents serving the African-American, Chinese, Hispanic, Korean, South Asian, and Vietnamese markets in the U.S.

Agents sold $5.4 billion of annuities of all types in 2013, a 14% increase from 2012.  Sales of single premium immediate annuities and the company’s deferred income annuity, Guaranteed Future Income Annuity, increased 6% through the fourth quarter compared with the same period in 2012.

Sales of New York Life’s MainStay family of mutual funds through agents rose 16% over the prior year, to $938 million. 

In 2013, New York Life hired 3,460 full-time agents.  It seeks to hire 3,600 financial professionals in 2014, with more than half to be women or individuals who represent the cultural markets. New York Life’s operations in Mexico, Seguros Monterrey New York Life, saw 14% sales growth compared with 2012.

 

MetLife hits 2013 target of $10 – $11 billion in VA sales

MetLife reported operating earnings of $1.6 billion for the fourth quarter of 2013, up 14% over the fourth quarter of 2012. On a per share basis, operating earnings were $1.37, up 10% over the prior year quarter. Operating earnings in the Americas grew 13%. Operating earnings in Asia increased 64% on a reported basis and 74% on a constant currency basis. Operating earnings in Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA) increased 51% on a reported basis and 48% on a constant currency basis. Partially offsetting these gains were larger losses in Corporate & Other.

Fourth quarter 2013 operating earnings included the following items:

  • Variable investment income above the company’s 2013 quarterly plan range by $101 million, or $0.09 per share, after tax and the impact of deferred acquisition costs (DAC).
  • As previously announced, strengthening of asbestos claim reserves, which reduced operating earnings by $101 million or $0.09 per share, after tax
  • An increase in litigation-related reserves, which reduced operating earnings by $46 million or $0.04 per share, after tax.
  • Favorable catastrophe experience and prior year loss reserve development of $15 million and an $11 million benefit from tax-related items in EMEA, which increased operating earnings by $26 million or $0.02 per share, after tax.

MetLife reported fourth quarter 2013 net income of $877 million, or $0.77 per share, including $242 million, after tax, in net derivative losses. Increases in interest rates, changes in foreign currencies and the impact of MetLife’s own credit during the quarter contributed to the net derivative losses.  

Premiums, fees & other revenues were $13.1 billion, down one percent (up two percent on a constant currency basis) from the fourth quarter of 2012.

Book value, excluding accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI), was $48.49 per share, up from $46.73 per share in the fourth quarter of 2012.

Full year results

For the full year 2013, MetLife reported operating earnings of $6.3 billion, up 11% over 2012. The increase reflects operating earnings growth of 13% in the Americas, 20% in Asia (27 percent on a constant currency basis) and 21 percent in EMEA (18 percent on a constant currency basis). Partially offsetting these gains were larger losses in Corporate & Other. On a per share basis, 2013 operating earnings were $5.63, up 7% over 2012. Growth on a per share basis was dampened by the increase in the number of outstanding common shares resulting from the conversion of $1.0 billion of the equity units issued in 2010 to fund the Alico acquisition.

MetLife reported full year 2013 net income of $3.2 billion, or $2.91 per share.

The Americas

Total operating earnings for the Americas were $1.4 billion, up 13%. Premiums, fees & other revenues for the Americas were $10.0 billion, up one percent, and excluding pension closeouts, up five percent.

Retail

Operating earnings for Retail were $658 million, up 4%. Premiums, fees & other revenues for Retail were $3.3 billion, up 4% primarily due to an increase in separate account fee income as well as higher income annuity sales. Fourth quarter 2013 variable annuity sales were $1.7 billion, down 49%. For the full year 2013, variable annuity sales were $10.6 billion – in line with the company’s plan of $10 to $11 billion.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

 

Mutual funds gain 20% in 2013: Cerulli

U.S. mutual funds showed positive flows of $282 billion in 2013, Cerulli Associates said in its January issue of The Cerulli-Edge–U.S. Monthly Product Trends. Equity funds led the mutual fund field last year, capturing $232 billion in flows.   

Last year, 10 investment managers garnered total inflows of $10 billion or more. With $74.7 billion, Vanguard added the most of net inflows of any mutual fund manager. Dimensional Fund Advisors followed with $22.5 billion, J.P. Morgan with $21 billion, MFS with $18 billion and and Oppenheimer Funds with $16.1 billion.

Among international funds, Vanguard’s Total International Stock Index Fund took in $17.9 billion, followed by Oakmark International Fund with $12.5 billion and Oppenheimer Developing Markets Fund with $6.7 billion.

Among index funds, the top three were Vanguard funds. Vanguard’s Total International Bond Index Fund took in $18.6 billion, the Total International Stock Index Fund, 17.9 billion and the Total Stock Market Index Fund, $17.5 billion.

Of the ten largest asset managers, PIMCO was the only one to show net outflows in 2013. PIMCO’s Total Return Fund saw outflows of $40.4 billion. Cerulli cited regulatory pressures on the fixed-income industry as the cause. Vanguard’s Inflation-Protected Securities and GNMA Fund experienced net outflows of $14.6 and $11.9 billion last year, respectively.

Among municipal bond funds, Vanguard’s Short Term Tax Exempt Fund had the highest inflows, with $1.2 billion, while its Intermediate-Term Tax-Exempt Fund had the highest outflows, at $3.9 billion.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Most plan sponsors shun income options: Callan

Annuity options lost considerable ground in the race for retirement income assets in defined contribution plans, as plan sponsors looked elsewhere, according to a new study by Callan Investments Institute.

Indeed, annuity options fell out of favor last year as a form of distribution payment in DC plans, while managed accounts and income drawdown solutions gained territory, Callan said in its new 2014 Defined Contribution Trends report.

The percentage of plan sponsors offering annuities as a distribution option dropped to 9% in 2013 from 22.1% in 2012. But the number of sponsors offering managed accounts and income drawdown services like Financial Engines rose to 6.4% in 2013 from 3.9% in 2012.

Additionally, annuity placement services (like Hueler Income Solutions) were offered by 5.1% of plans last year, a drop from 6.5% a year earlier. Prevalence of in-plan GLWB (guaranteed lifetime withdrawal products) fell to 2.6% of plans from 6.5%.

This trend is expected to persist. When asked if they would offer an annuity as a distribution payment option in 2014, 59.3% of surveyed sponsors said it was “very unlikely.” Currently, 74.4% of plan sponsors do not offer retirement income solutions at all. Nineteen percent of sponsors said they were “somewhat likely” to offer a GLWB option, but only 4.8% said they were “very likely” to do so. 

The most common reason among plan sponsors for not offering retirement income options was concern about fiduciary implications. Sponsors also cited the administrative complexity of income options, a lack of need or urgency for them, concerns about insurer solvency and lack of participant demand.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Prudential launches new version of Highest Daily GLWB

Prudential Annuities has launched a new version of its Highest Daily variable annuity optional living benefit. The new rider represents another de-risking move: the 5% roll-up will be subject to change for new business, 1o% of premium must go into a fixed return account and owners will have to wait until age 85 to get a 6% guaranteed withdrawal rate.  

The new rider, HD v3.0, which is available on Prudential Premier Retirement Variable Annuities, replaces the previous v2.1 iteration of the Highest Daily rider. The differentiating feature of the HD rider is that it locks in a new guaranteed benefit base on any day when the account value exceeds the current benefit base and reaches a new high water mark.

Prudential’s VA is also unusual in that it uses a modified version of a risk management strategy called “constant proportion portfolio insurance,” or CPPI, which automatically shifts money to bonds from stocks when equity markets decline, and vice-versa.

The prospectus describes this as “a proprietary mathematical formula that monitors an investor’s account daily and automatically transfers amounts between the chosen variable investment portfolios and the AST Investment Grade Bond Portfolio.”

On this version of the rider, the current annual roll-up of the benefit base is  5% for the first 10 years or until the first withdrawal (whichever comes first). In a release Prudential said it will retain the flexibility to “change the roll-up rate and/or the withdrawal percentages for new contracts in response to market conditions.”

The current withdrawal percentages for sole contract owners range from 3% (for contract owners aged 50 to 54) to 6% (for contract owners ages 85 and older). The withdrawal percentage for those ages 65 to 84 is 5%. 

Regarding investment restrictions, contract owners must allocate 10% of each purchase premium to a fixed-rate “secure value” account. Prudential has also added two new asset allocation portfolio options: the AST T. Rowe Price Growth Opportunities Portfolio, an 85/15 (equity/bond) model, and the AST FI Pyramis Quantitative Portfolio, a 65/35 (equity/bond) model. There are now 22 asset allocation portfolios.

The B share of the contract has a seven-year surrender period with an initial surrender charge of 7%, a mortality and expense risk charge of 1.30% and an administrative charge of 0.15%. The minimum initial purchase premium for the B share is just $1,000.

The L share of the contract has a four-year surrender period with an initial surrender charge of 7%, a mortality and expense risk charge of 1.75% and an administrative charge of 0.15%. The minimum initial purchase premium for the L share is $10,000.

The HD v3.0 rider has a current charge of 1.00% a year (1.10% for joint contracts) without the HD death benefit. With the HD death benefit, the charges are 50 basis points greater. Portfolio expenses range from a low of 58 basis points to a high of 177 basis points.

According to the prospectus, the permitted subaccounts for those who choose the HD v3.0 rider include:

AST Academic Strategies Asset Allocation

AST Advanced Strategies

AST Balanced Asset Allocation

AST BlackRock Global Strategies

AST BlackRock iShares ETF

AST Capital Growth Asset Allocation

AST Defensive Asset Allocation

AST FI Pyramis Asset Allocation

AST FI Pyramis Quantitative

AST Franklin Templeton Founding Funds Plus

AST Goldman Sachs Multi-Asset

AST J.P. Morgan Global Thematic

AST J.P. Morgan Strategic Opportunities

AST New Discovery Asset Allocation

AST Preservation Asset Allocation

AST Prudential Growth Allocation

AST RCM World Trends

AST Schroders Global Tactical

AST Schroders Multi-Asset World Strategies

AST T. Rowe Price Asset Allocation

AST T. Rowe Price Growth Opportunities

AST Wellington Management Hedged Equity

In addition, the prospectus said, “There are two types of MVA Options available under each Annuity – the Long-Term MVA Options and the DCA MVA Options. If you elect an optional living benefit, only the DCA MVA Option will be available to you. In brief, under the Long-Term MVA Options, you earn interest over a multi-year time period that you have selected… Currently, the Guarantee Periods we offer are 3 years, 5 years, 7 years, and 10 years… Under the DCA MVA Options, you earn interest over a 6 month or 12 month period while your Account Value in that option is systematically transferred monthly to the Sub-accounts you have designated.”

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Are You Being Served?

“All the heirs hate it,” rued the paralegal at the law firm that represented the company that held the reverse mortgage on my late father’s two-story condo in a development in suburban Philadelphia. They hate getting sued, that is.

I certainly did. As I explained to the paralegal, I answered my doorbell a few weeks ago to find an officer of the law on the stoop—a stone-faced Lehigh County sheriff’s deputy wearing a Stetson and a brush moustache who, after I confirmed my identity, handed me a thin sheaf of papers, stapled in the upper left hand corner.

Underneath a cover sheet that was peppered with opaque words like “prothonotary,” I found a “Complaint in Mortgage Foreclosure.” The plaintiff was an Austin, Texas, bank that I’d never heard of. The defendant was myself, the executor of my dad’s estate.

Leafing through the “complaint,” I was momentarily transfixed when I saw the phrase, “Amount Due: $264,566.57,” but exhaled when I reached paragraph 12, which said: “Plaintiff does not hold the named Defendants personally liable to this cause of action and releases them from any personal liability.” So why was I being sued?

When one or both holders of a reverse mortgage die, the lender can’t simply seize the house. In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, where I live, and apparently in other states, lenders must follow the same procedures that they follow when foreclosing on a home whose owner defaulted on a regular mortgage.

That’s a consumer protection measure. In the case of an ordinary mortgage, it protects impecunious owners from summary eviction. It gives them time to seek bankruptcy protection or repair their finances. In the case of a reverse mortgage, it gives the survivors an interval in which to decide whether they want to exercise their right to sell the house and pay off the reverse mortgage. If they’re not interested in keeping the house, it also gives them plenty of time—perhaps too much time—to empty the house of a parent’s possessions.

A widower, my father died unexpectedly during a short trip to Florida in early 2013. Expecting to return home to Pennsylvania within a week, he’d left the house in casual disarray. That’s how we found it. It’s a strange experience, walking through your late parents’ home for the first time. The contour of their lives is still there, as distinct as the impression left by a head on a pillow. I also felt like an intruder—the way I felt when I would arrive home from college, find no one home and the doors locked, and have to break into my own bedroom through a window.  

My brother, sister and I needed time to decide what to do with my parents’ belongings. My father had left an entire household frozen in mid-stride. A pipe rack, briar pipes and ashes. Poker chips in an aluminum carrying case. Golf clubs and best-selling books from the 1950s. Cufflinks and a fake Rolex watch. My mother’s decoupaged chairs and tables. Antiques, pictures in ornate frames, small appliances. Drawer after drawer stuffed with old letters, picture post cards, greeting cards and photographs. Sorting out all of this would take some time.

We siblings had never had a conversation with our father about exactly what would happen to the house after he died. (We’d never talked at all about his death, ever. We didn’t know much about his reverse mortgage, except that he’d used his home equity to trade up to a larger condo instead of staying in his old place and taking cash out—which turned out to be a poor idea.) After finding the reverse mortgage documents among his papers, I called the 800-number and told a phone rep that we didn’t want the house. She told me to wait for an update.

Months passed. Property taxes and maintenance fees were accruing, which made us nervous. We called the mortgage company again and were told to have patience during the foreclosure process, which was required by law and might last as long as 600 days from my father’s death. 

Then I started receiving letters from bankruptcy lawyers. At first, I didn’t understand why. “Chapter 13 is an effective way to SAVE YOUR PROPERTY and put an end to the torment of debt,” said one letter. “You may be able to stop real estate foreclosure eliminate unsecured debt and keep your property by filing a chapter 13 with only $331 and no upfront legal fees.” Then one day, a few weeks ago, I found out why. 

Without warning, a sheriff’s vehicle (large five-pointed gold star on driver’s door) appeared in my driveway, followed by the chime of my doorbell. After the deputy handed me the papers and drove away, I picked up the phone and called the plaintiff’s law firm to ask what this meant and what I should do. The receptionist commiserated; she had heard this story before. Many heirs become frightened when a sheriff’s deputy serves them with papers, she said. Some of them worry that their own credit rating will be in jeopardy, or that they might need to hire a lawyer.  

If reverse mortgages are to gain greater respectability and popularity, this tactless procedure will probably need to change. Reverse mortgage brokers are well aware of this ham-handed process, and they don’t like it. They know it’s not helping their industry’s image. “More clients are passing and I’m seeing upset adult children getting put through the wringer afterwards,” Alain Valles, president of Direct Finance Corp. a reverse mortgage writer in Norwell, MA, told RIJ. “I’ve told fellow loan officers that we need to explain all this to borrower at the beginning of the process.

“But many clients don’t want adult children to know what they’re doing. In my own practice, we give the borrowers printed materials to give to the children. I agree 100% that the reverse mortgage industry is doing a terrible job communicating that the children have no obligation to do anything. Let’s tone down the legalized rhetoric. On the other hand, too many people automatically turn the house over to the lender.”

So there you have it. This clunky system is designed to protect the heirs from potentially losing valuable equity in the parents’ homes, and it unquestionably does. But it also leaves many others feeling rattled and blindsided. There should be a more streamlined, and more civil way for reverse mortgage companies to take possession of these leveraged properties after the owners die. Tender feelings aside, the current method, with its long limbo period, must create extra costs for the mortgage company, which they undoubtedly pass along to their borrowers. 

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. 

RetiremEntrepreneur: Andrew Rudd

What I do: Advisor Software builds analytical tools to help advisers provide better advice to their clients. We help the adviser get more clients, deliver more relevant advice to the client, and develop stronger and more collaborative relationships with clients. For example, our “goal-based” investing method helps clients identify their goals, prioritize them, and identify the optimal strategy to best fund them. I am very much a proponent of identifying the goals and aspirations clients want to achieve in life and retirement.  

Rudd RetiremEntrepreneur Box Who my clients are: Of the three groups in our client base, one includes the large platforms, asset managers and broker-dealers, such as Charles Schwab, Russell Investments, State Street Global Advisors, and LPL Financial, among others. We provide them with client acquisition, portfolio rebalancing, asset allocation, risk modeling and other analytical tools. The second group of clients consists of advisers, and the third are  individual investors.

Why people hire me: We tend to be more willing to do custom work than our competitors. We provide customized services for each client—developing specifications, workflow and interface design—which means we spend a lot of time with them. Our product business has a strong reputation and track record. It gives clients confidence that we understand exactly how advisers use their tools. Most recently, we’ve developed a goal-based financial planning tool that significantly improves adviser productivity.

How I get paid:We’re flexible in customizing our fees depending on the client’s considerations. Some clients like to structure fees by the number of seats and type of usage. Others are interested in a flat fee.

Goalgami box

 Where I came from: I started my working life as an academic. I received a PhD in finance and operations research at UC Berkeley, where I co-founded Barra, Inc. with a colleague, Barr Rosenberg. I taught at the business school at Cornell University for a number of years, then returned to Berkeley to work with Barra. We provided services to the institutional financial community. We delivered indices, portfolio risk, performance analytics and optimization tools. In 2004, we sold Barra to Morgan Stanley. That’s when I moved full time to Advisor Software.

Why a private venture instead of academia: I was always interested in creating products. But I’m still interested in academics. I write occasionally for academic journals and I’m finishing a book with a colleague. I like to keep one leg in each camp. Both lifestyles have their advantages and disadvantages. Both provide challenges that make life interesting and rewarding.

My view on annuities: There are good and bad aspects to annuities. The key disadvantage, for the client, is the loss of control of the assets. The benefit, on the other hand, is the assurance of a lifetime cash flow. There’s clearly a use for annuities, but there’s a trade off.  I don’t personally own any annuities, simply because in my present circumstances they don’t fit into my financial plan, but that’s not to say they won’t at some stage in the future.

My retirement philosophy: The success of Barra has enabled me to be aggressive in saving for retirement and investing in various philanthropic ventures. My philosophy is to have enough to last for my doddering years, to support the causes I find important and valuable and, if anything is left over, to leave it to my surviving family. (RIJ has heard through the grapevine that the British-born, squash-playing Rudd, now 66, bought a small vineyard north of San Francisco and will spend at least part of his “doddering years” pursuing a passion for wine and viticulture.)

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

The Active Ingredient

In March of 2008, Bear Stearns introduced the first actively managed ETF, the Bear Stearns Current Yield Fund. Later that year, Bear Stearns went belly up, and the first actively managed ETF, after just months from its creation, was put to rest.

Since then, the universe of index-tracking (passive) ETFs has grown exponentially, from several hundred in 2008 to 1,480 today. Purveyors have not only endeavored to track every possible index, but they have also created their own newfangled indexes to track. In search of sales, the industry has been trying to bury the stigma of Bear Stearns and raise interest in actively managed ETFS.

And so, in the past year or two, we’ve seen the introduction of 80 actively managed ETFs. The largest, and most successful, is the PIMCO Total Return ETF (BOND), with current assets of $4 billion. The smallest is… well, the smallest may be out of business by the time this article appears.

Active ETFs have not exactly set the investment world on fire. Why? The memory of Bear Stearns may be a deterrent. ETF investors may simply have a penchant for indexing. Or perhaps ETF providers are hesitant to reveal their secret sauces to investors: ETFs, at least to date, have required much more transparency than mutual funds. (ETF managers must disclose their holdings every day; mutual funds managers disclose theirs every quarter).

But unless ETF providers find another avenue of brand-extension, they will try to sell active ETFs, as well as to lobby regulators to equalize the transparency rules.

Is this good for investors?

As you know, most academics who have studied the issue have concluded, to the chagrin of many on Wall Street, that few actively managed funds beat the indexes over the long run. It’s largely a matter of costs, which matter greatly in determining returns, as Vanguard advertisements attest.

Ah, but the new actively managed ETFs are considerably less costly than actively managed mutual funds. According to Morningstar, the average expense ratio of active ETFs is only 75 basis points, or about 60% of the average cost of actively managed mutual funds (126 basis points). If the academics were to compare passive investing with active ETF investing, indexing might not have such a clear edge. 

That said, passive ETFs are similarly less costly than passive mutual funds. Passive ETFs have an average expense ratio of 60 basis points versus an average expense ratio for passive mutual funds of 75 basis points, per Morningstar. (Coincidentally, passive mutual funds and active ETFs have the same average expense ratio.)

So, to the extent that lower costs influence long-term returns, the new active ETFs, collectively, should perform better than active mutual funds, about the same as passive mutual funds, and not as well as passive ETFs.

Of course, costs aren’t the only determinant of long-term returns. The quality of management (of both active and passive funds, but especially of active funds) is also critical.

Bear Stearns’ management wasn’t very good. We’ll just have to wait and see about quality of management of the new active ETFs.

Russell Wild, a fee-only advisor in Allentown, PA, is the author of Exchange Traded Funds for Dummies, 2nd Edition, 2012.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

The federal income tax turned 100 this week

The 16th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified on February 3, 1913, authorizing Congress to levy taxes on income and giving the government a replacement for the tax on alcohol—thus paving the way for the passage of the Volstead Act (Prohibition) in 1919.

“In its first two years, the [income] tax was modest, affecting only a very few citizens and provided only a small part of the government’s total revenue,” the U.S. Census Bureau reported this week. “But the need to fund our involvement in World War I moved income taxes to the center of federal finances.”

In 2011, individuals paid around $1.7 trillion in federal income tax, while state and local income taxes amounted to $114 billion in just the second quarter alone of 2013.  

income tax chart

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Half of U.S. women fear becoming ‘bag ladies’—Allianz Life

Women are becoming more financially confident, but they still face major obstacles to achieving financial security. And the financial industry doesn’t fully understand their needs or how they prefer to learn about financial planning.

So says the newly released “2013 Women, Money & Power Study” by Allianz Life, a survey sponsored by Allianz Life of more than 2,000 women ages 25-75 with a minimum household income of $30,000 a year.

Despite growing confidence among women, “Irrational fears about losing it all and becoming a bag lady remain,” said Katie Libbe, Allianz Life vice president of Consumer Insights, in a release. “Some women keep a ‘secret stash’ of money that their spouse or partner does not know about, which reflects their need to protect themselves financially.”

CFOs of household. Over half of all women surveyed said they are the chief financial officers of their households and 57% say they have more earning power than their partners. A majority say they primarily handle investment decisions, research retirement ideas, handle tax preparation and teach their children about money. Nearly seven in ten (68%) saying they have increased their financial involvement since the crisis.

Few are involved in investment decisions. One in five fits the profile of women who are actively involved in major investment decisions, understand financial products well and are interested in learning more about financial matters. Such “women of influence” may have a high salary and extensive education, “but [they] are just as likely to be a stay-at-home mom who manages the family’s financial future,” explains Libbe. Seventeen percent admitted to keeping a secret stash of money their spouse or partner doesn’t know about.

‘Bag Lady’ syndrome remains.  Nearly half of all women (49%) still fear becoming a “bag lady.” Single (56%) and divorced women (54%) fear it slightly more than do Women of Influence (46%). The thought of running out of money in retirement keeps nearly six in ten women (57%) awake at night. Lack of adequate savings was their top retirement concern.

Non-traditional families. Single mothers, women in blended families or same-sex couples, and women in households with multiple generations under one roof often feel too busy to address financial planning strategies. Ninety-two percent of single mothers and 80% of same-sex female couples say that their nontraditional family structure increases the need for financial awareness.   

Underserved. Today’s women still feel underserved by the financial industry. Many believe financial information and materials are geared only toward the wealthy. About 20% say their belief that “financial planning is for people that have more money than me” is a major barrier to getting more involved. Sixty-two percent of women don’t have a financial professional. Of those that do, 69% do not view their financial professional as a go-to source of information on spending, saving or investing.

For more insights from the 2013 Allianz Life Women, Money & Power Study, download a copy of the full 10-page white paper at http://www.allianzlife.com/wmp.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

The QWeMA Group inks deal with The Principal, launches annuity benchmark

A version of the retirement product allocation tool created by The QWeMA Group—the company that Canadian finance professor Moshe Milevsky (left) sold to CANNEX Financial in 2013—has been adopted by The Principal Financial Group for use by its career advisers and its licensed phone counselors, according to a release by The Principal this week.

Principal’s service-marked version of the tool is called the Principal Income Protector. In the past, ManuLife and its subsidiary, John Hancock Financial, as well as Pacific Life have used the software, which shows the retirement income sustainability (RIS) percentage—the likelihood that income will last for life—of various allocations to mutual funds, variable annuities with income benefits, and life-contingent annuities.

The new tool was revealed to financial professionals who attended a Retirement Income Boot Camp sponsored by The Principal, the release said. Milevsky, Ed Slott of Ed Slott and Company; and Laurie Santos, director of Yale University’s Comparative Cognition Laboratory, spoke at the event.

“The tool gives people a retirement income sustainability number. In the process, it shows them that the more sustainability they want, the more they might have to give up in terms of legacies or bequests,” Milevsky told RIJ.

As the percentage of assets that are allocated to mutual funds or deferred variable annuities or income annuities gets dialed up or down, the RIS goes up or down. “Advisers seem to be using it to determine retirement readiness more than to sell certain types of products. It can serve as the back end to whatever front-end the company wants to build,” he added.

Milevsky said he presumed that the companies licensing the QWeMA algorithm had collected data on the cost-effectiveness of using it as an advice or selling tool, but he hasn’t seen any data of that sort.    

CANNEX PAY Index

Separately, the CANNEX PAY Index was introduced this week. Milvesky, who retains a financial interest in QWeMA and is research director at CANNEX, said in a release that QWeMA and CANNEX had introduced an unprecedented single-premium immediate annuity payout index.

The benchmark will provide average payouts for single male, single female and joint life annuities against which advisers and investors can compare the payouts of particular products. Along with publicizing future average annuity payouts, Cannex will use some three million separate historical annuity quotes that it has warehoused over the years to show what the index would have been in years past.

In a release, Milevsky said:

“The index is calculated using an extensive dataset of annuity payouts, tracking rates for life annuities at various ages and over time,” the release said. “Note that this isn’t another index based on periodic surveys, historical Monte Carlos or hypothetical affordability numbers. It represents live prices and I am convinced it will become the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) of life annuities.

“As you can see from the attached, the CANNEX Pay Index yield for a 70 year-old male on Wednesday January 29, 2014 , is 7.73% per year. This means that the typical payout annuity from the top ten insurance companies would provide an income of $7,730 per year for life, on a premium of $100,000. For reference, compare this against the (infamous) 4% sustainable spending rule.” 

The CANNEX PAY Index fluctuates (daily) based on market and demographic conditions. CANNEX will be monitor this number and report it each month. In the near future, CANNEX will also make available to all researchers the dataset of historical annuity quotes that went into the creation of the new index.

“We wanted to create a transparent index that the major newspapers could start printing along with the Dow and the S&P 500. It’s a number that will change from week to week and month to month. It’s much more than the annuity quotes that you can get online.  We took a lot of care in averaging the prices of the major insurance companies. We weighted them by market penetration. We created filters and threw out outliers. We back-created the index based on past data,” Milevsky said in an interview.

The data that’s used to create the index may also have other uses. “Cannex has a treasure trove of annuity price data that nobody had been leveraging,” he added. “We can invert annuity prices and see how long the market believe that people will live. We can compare the prices to Treasury yields to see whether insurance companies are being more or less generous. It can start a conversation. If prices go up or down, people will have an opportunity to talk about why.”

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

    

Schwab introduces all-ETF 401(k) plan

If index funds are good for 401(k) plan participants, would ETFs be even better? Charles Schwab seems to think so.

Schwab Retirement Plan Services, Inc., which serves 1.3 million 401(k) plan participants, this week announced a new full-service 401(k) program in which exchange-traded funds will serve as core investments. Participants will be able to own the ETFs in a Guided Choice or Morningstar Associates managed account, or in a self-directed brokerage account, if the plan offers one.

Fred Barstein, founder of The Retirement Advisor University (TRAU), told RIJ that Schwab’s move is “Potentially important—though the real question is whether there is a significant price difference between index funds and ETFs, and will it matter in the small and mid-size market? Will the perception that ETFs are cleaner (no trading costs) than index funds be appealing? Will the greater variety be appealing?

“For most people, ETFs are excellent building blocks to capture beta within managed investments like TDFs, custom asset allocation funds and even retirement income—which is the strategy BlackRock seems to be pursuing for the DC market,” he added.

In a release, Schwab claimed to be the first major full-service provider to offer such a plan. Steve Anderson, head of Schwab’s institutional retirement business, described it as “an additional version of Schwab Index Advantage,” a program that Schwab started in 2012 to help participants “use low-cost index mutual funds and personalized advice.”

The new version has a goal of “further driving down investment costs by using low-cost exchange-traded funds,” the release said.

Schwab estimated that a 401(k) plan using index exchange-traded funds could cost 90% less than a 401(k) plan using actively managed mutual funds and 30% less than a 401(k) plan using index mutual funds.

“Several employers have already expressed strong interest in becoming first adopters of the exchange-traded fund version of Schwab Index Advantage. Given the typical 6-12 month sales and implementation cycle in the 401(k) industry, the firm anticipates clients will be offering this new version of Schwab Index Advantage to their employees later this year,” the Schwab release said.

According to the release:

“Using a patent-pending process, Schwab Index Advantage is the first 401(k) program that fully integrates exchange-traded funds as core investments within the plan, including commission-free intraday investing along with the ability to process partial share interests,” Anderson said.

“Many solutions on the market today unitize shares, batch trades, trade only once a day at a single price, or require individuals to open a self-directed brokerage account to access exchange-traded funds. “We believe a truly effective offering requires the ability to invest in and receive allocations of both full and partial shares of exchange-traded funds when the market is open, and that’s what we’ve built. Other 401(k) offerings that we’ve seen take a less comprehensive approach to including exchange-traded funds and also tend to serve smaller plans,” he added.

Assets in exchange-traded funds have grown from $66 billion in 2000 to more than $1.6 trillion at the end of 2013 according to the Investment Company Institute. “The notion by some industry commentators that these benefits should not be available to 401(k) participants reminds me of the proponents of gas lighting who, 100 years ago, argued that electricity was dangerous and unnecessary,” Anderson said in the release. He added:

“Despite the obvious benefits of exchange-traded funds, mutual fund companies that dominate the 401(k) industry have largely ignored them – simply because these companies lack either the capabilities or the will to effectively accommodate exchange-traded funds in the retirement plans they offer. Others in the industry suggest that offering exchange-traded funds to 401(k) participants will lead to over-active trading, an argument not supported by the facts.2 We heard the same false argument 25 years ago when the industry began updating participant 401(k) balances on a daily basis, instead of quarterly,” Anderson noted.

Employers and their retirement plan consultants who use the new Schwab program will be able to build investment lineups from a list of 80 low-cost index exchange-traded funds in more than 25 asset categories. Providers include Charles Schwab Investment Management, ETF Securities, First Trust, Guggenheim Investments, Invesco PowerShares, iShares ETFs, PIMCO, State Street Global Advisors, Van Eck Global, Vanguard and United States Commodity Funds.

Participants will be able to use managed account programs fromGuidedChoice Asset Management, Inc. or Morningstar Associates, LLC.  

The index mutual fund version of Schwab Index Advantage was launched in 2012 and includes an automatic enrollment feature and a managed account advisory service. Before the introduction of Schwab Index Advantage, only about four percent of Schwab participants elected to opt for a managed account; today, 85% do.

Schwab said it can deliver the managed account service for 45 basis points or less ($45 per $10,000 invested). With the ETF management fees, participants would pay about 60 basis points per year in fund investment costs and managed account fees. The typical expense ratio for managed account program based on actively managed mutual funds would be 90 to 140 basis points, Schwab said.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC.  All rights reserved.

Popular FIA adds new index crediting method

Security Benefit Life’s Secure Income Annuity, the second-best selling fixed indexed annuity in the first three-quarters of 2013 according to Wink’s Sales and Market Report, has added a new interest crediting option based on the Morgan Stanley Dynamic Allocation (MSDA) Index.

Secure Income Annuity offers a guaranteed lifetime income rider for 95 basis points a year. The rider includes a seven percent annual roll-up in the benefit base for the first 10 years (or until income payments begin, if earlier). The roll-up is renewable for contract owners under age 80, with the roll-up applied until age 85 or for a maximum of 20 years.

The contract offers an initial premium bonus of between 2% and 8%, depending on the state of issue. According to product literature, an early surrender may force a recapture of part of the bonus.

For the S&P 500 Index, annual point-to-point crediting method, the cap or maximum rate was 3.25% a year as of January 6, 2014. The S&P 500 monthly sum index cap is 1.60%. There’s a 10-year surrender period. The payout rate starts at 4.5% at age 55 (4.0% for joint life) and goes up by 10 basis points per year until age 90.

The Morgan Stanley Dynamic Allocation Index is described in the product literature as “a rules-based strategy that consists of equities, short-term Treasuries, mid- to long-term bonds, and alternatives,” plus cash, that are in turn made up of sub-asset classes.

Four times a month, the holdings are rebalanced, up to a fixed allocation limit for each asset class. The Index gets exposure to those asset classes and sub-asset classes by holding exchange-traded funds, which are themselves index funds that can be bought or sold throughout the trading day.

For instance, the index can hold up to 100% equities, but no more than 50% domestic, global or emerging market equities. It can hold up to 75% bonds, but no more than 20% high-yield bonds. It can hold up to 50% alternative investments, but no more than 25% gold or real estate.

“On each rebalancing selection date,” the literature said, “the index methodology is applied to determine the asset mix that had the maximum historical return with 5% annualized volatility during the prior 63-trading-day period. Over the next five-trading-day rebalancing period, the weight of each sub-asset class is adjusted from its prior level, and the new asset allocation is gradually established.”

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

MyRA Defies the Equities-First Rule

Does the MyRA strategy contradict the investment rule-of-thumb about investing in equities when you’re young?  

The default investment of the automatic-Roth IRA (“MyRA”) that President Obama ordained in his State of the Union address last week was a bond fund that mimics the Government Securities Investment Fund that’s available in federal workers’ Thrift Savings Plan. 

The investment would resemble the “R-bond” that David John, William Gale and Spencer Smith described in an AARP Public Policy Institute paper in October 2012:

The R-Bond would be an account, not a specific bond. It would pay interest at a rate similar to the five-year Treasury (T-Bond), with rates set every six months. There would be no maturity date, and amounts could be added to the R-Bond account at any time.

Workers who don’t opt out of MyRAs, which are intended to be “starter” Roth IRAs, buy R-bonds with payroll deferrals (with $25 initial minimum, $5 per pay period). Contributions wouldn’t be tax deductible—which is a little strange, because Obama clearly wants to democratize the tax expenditure on retirement savings—but low- and middle-income workers can claim the Retirement Savings Tax Credit of up to $2,000. But I digress.

When the value of a MyRA account reaches $15,000, the IRA would roll over to an IRA custodian/fund company under contract with the government, or to a new 401(k) plan (if the employer decides to sponsor one) or, in the event of a job change, to a personal Roth IRA.  

Wait. The first $15,000 goes into a bond fund? Isn’t that heresy?

Presumably, a lot of those MyRA owners will be young employees or first-time investors. Had they worked for a company that sponsored an auto-enrolled 401(k) plan, they probably would have been defaulted into a 2045 or 2050 target date fund. Those funds allocate up to 90% of their assets into domestic and international stock funds.

The asset allocation strategy of the MyRA accounts evidently defies the conventional wisdom, embedded in TDFs, that investors with long time horizons should invest mainly in stocks. As I understand it, the conventional wisdom is based largely on the historical outperformance of stocks vis-à-vis bonds.   

Speaking as a 401(k) participant and a father, I’ve never thought that a person’s initial savings should go into equities. In my case, I waited until I’d saved about $10,000 in my 401k) before I invested in stocks. I’ve advised my grown children to do the same.

People with better credentials than mine endorse this strategy, for a variety of reasons. 

What the experts say 

In the Fall 2013 issue of the Journal of Retirement, Robert Arnott of Research Affiliates, LLC, wrote that “the heuristic of buying stocks when young and bonds when mature—a rule of thumb by which many billions are invested—is flawed.” One reason, he says, is that when you’re young, your account is too small for an uptick in stocks to make much difference.

On MyRA specifically, Arnott’s opinion is nuanced. “Obama’s MyRA has a few Achilles’ Heel’s, notably the fact that there’s only one investment option, which happens to offer roughly zero real interest rate, and that the enrollee has to take the initiative to sign up. Accordingly, few will,” he told RIJ in an email.

“But, you are correct that the notion that starting conservative and becoming more aggressive beats the opposite strategy, which is dominant in target dated strategies.”

Moshe Milevsky is the well-known York University professor who wrote a guide to life-cycle investing called “Are You a Stock or a Bond?” He links asset allocation to employment; people with volatile careers should hold bonds, and people with safe university or government jobs can afford to go long on stocks.

 “Early on, saving $10,000 to $15,000 is much more important than the asset allocation,” he said in an email. “Having equities (vs. bonds) very early on in the process isn’t as important. Of course, eventually, you want to move them into some sort of equity exposure (if their job is safe and if they understand risk, etc.).

The United Kingdom has a new program called NEST (National Employment Savings Trust), a government-sponsored workplace savings program for the low- and middle-income workers whose employers don’t offer a plan. NEST uses TDFs, but during the initial five-year “Foundation” phase, contributions go into a low-volatility balanced fund.

NEST’s reasoning runs on the same track as Milevsky’s. “If you look at the demographics of our target group, they have equity-like human capital,” Paul Todd, NEST’s investment policy manager, told RIJ in 2012. “They’re the first people to experience redundancy [layoffs]; they may not have property [real estate] or personal savings, so there’s a lot more volatility to their human capital. That makes you think harder about what’s suitable for them.

“Our research showed that for people who don’t have diversification of resources, it’s not helpful to expose them to high levels of volatility right off the bat.” Another danger: early disappointment could discourage those people from ever risking money in the stock market again.

Employer mandate?

President Obama’s MyRA program (which has policy roots going back to 1999) has already come under some criticism. People have scoffed at the low returns on the R-bonds. But a riskier default investment would risk a backlash—just look at the criticism of TDFs after the 2008 crash—and the use of a balanced fund might have introduced administrative chores and expenses. Government bonds were clearly the safest, simplest default investment for the beta-version of a national workplace savings plan.

So far, I’ve seen only a few signs that the MyRA program will trigger the kind of backlash that exploded in 2010, after Obama included a similar if not identical initiative in his annual budget. The conservative blogosphere went ballistic with accusations that the program was government confiscation of private savings in disguise. You can find that sentiment here.

That’s just a sideshow, however. A larger potential problem is that employees will opt out. The biggest threat to the MyRA program will come from small employers (excluding the very smallest and newest firms) who resent a federal mandate to set up automatic payroll deferrals (of at least $25 to start and $5 per payday) for their employees.

“Employers that do not provide any employer-sponsored savings plan would be required to connect their employees with a payroll deduction IRA,” said the White House Fact Sheet on MyRA. A presidential memorandum on MyRA for Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew said:

“Within 90 days of the date of this memorandum, you shall begin work with employers, stakeholders, and, as appropriate, other Federal agencies to develop a pilot project to make the security developed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section available through payroll deduction to facilitate easy and automatic contributions.”

Here’s what the advocate for small businesses said last week: “Similar to the concerns with health care, where you’re trying to expand coverage, when you mandate options, you drive people to something that’s not as good as what the private market is offering,” said Aliya Wong, head of retirement policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Of course, the point of MyRA is that the status quo doesn’t have a remedy for the fact that 87 million of America’s 120 million households have an average of less than $17,000 in investable assets. Sure, people can save without a workplace plan. But they aren’t. From a public policy perspective, MyRA isn’t a panacea—for one thing, Roth IRAs are easier to dip into and squander than 401(k)s or traditional IRAs. But it’s a start. It has already inspired Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) to revive his USA Retirement Funds Act. We shall see what the Treasury pilot program produces.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

 

Flight plans and financial plans seem to fly together

Airline pilots tend to save aggressively and are more likely to be engaged in retirement planning than average, according to a survey by Cleary Gull, a financial services firm in Milwaukee.

Of the pilots surveyed, 80% contribute to their retirement plan, and more than half contribute 10% of salary per year. Twelve percent said they contribute more than 20%, 41% contribute 11-20%, and 20% contribute 6-10%. 

Cleary Gull works with pilots from all of the major airlines. In addition to managing pilot assets, Cleary Gull offers a free asset allocation service to pilots. Many pilot have changed their plans significantly since the financial crisis due to mergers and streamlining of benefits plans.

“Most pilots have had to work longer and save more in order to reach their retirement goals,” said Bob Warner, managing director at Cleary Gull. “Many are seeking outside guidance to help them with the complexity.”

Seventy-four percent of pilots say they have a financial plan. A third of their financial plans were prepared by an advisor. The survey found that 19% rebalance their portfolio quarterly, 23% rebalance annually and 40% rebalance on an ad hoc basis. Many either work with an investment advisor (24%) or want to work with an advisor (63%).   

Pilots tend to be confident in their retirement planning ability (75%). A good portion of pilots use the brokerage window (60%), which allows them to invest in individual stocks or mutual funds not included in their plan’s investment line up. 

Cleary Gull surveyed 182 United and Continental pilots who are part of the legacy 401(k) retirement plans in December 2013. Cleary Gull is a leading registered investment advisor guiding client assets totaling $2.6 billion as of 12/31/13 with a focus on high net worth individuals, pilots and health care organizations. 

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Armenians protest mandatory national DC plan

Thousands of Armenians have taken to the streets to protest the mandatory funding of the second-pillar pension system, introduced at the beginning of this year.

According to reports from French news agency AFP, approximately 6,000 protesters marched in the Armenian capital of Yerevan over the weekend to protest against the government’s controversial decision. 

Since 1 January, all Armenians born after 1974 have had to transfer 5% of their salaries to newly created pension funds managed by the local subsidiaries of France’s Amundi and Germany’s Talanx Asset Management.

According to the AFP, Naira Zohrabyan, secretary of opposition party Prosperous Armenia, described the law as a “racket”, allowing the government to “get its hands into people’s pockets.”

Protesters have argued that people should be able to decide what happens to their salaries, and that any supplementary pension payment should be voluntary.

Some news sources reported that the protesters have also filed a petition with the Constitutional Court. So far, the government has made no comment on the protests or the petition.

© 2014 IPE.com

The Bucket

T. Rowe Price reports AUM of $692.4 billion 

In its 2013 fourth quarter report, Baltimore-based T. Rowe Price Group, Inc., reported net revenues of $929.8 million, net income of $287.7 million, and diluted earnings per common share of $1.06.

One year earlier, net revenues were $787.3 million, net income was $232.0 million, and diluted earnings per common share was $.88 in the fourth quarter of 2012, the publicly held no-load mutual fund and 401(k) provider reported.

Investment advisory revenues for the fourth quarter of 2013 were $811.7 million, up $134.1 million from the comparable 2012 period, as average assets under management increased $101.2 billion, or 18%.

During the fourth quarter of 2013, market appreciation and income of $45.1 billion and net cash inflows of $0.1 billion lifted assets under management to a record $692.4 billion at December 31, 2013.

Annual results for 2013 include:

  • Net revenues of nearly $3.5 billion
  • Net income of $1.0 billion
  • Diluted earnings per share of $3.90
  • An increase of 16% from the $3.36 per share earned in 2012

Year-end assets under management of $692.4 billion increased $115.6 billion from the end of 2012, including $127.6 billion from market appreciation and income, reduced by net cash outflows of $12.0 billion during 2013. Net cash inflows of $10.2 billion into the mutual funds were more than offset by net cash outflows of $22.2 billion from other investment portfolios.

The vast majority of these net outflows from our other investment portfolios were concentrated among several large institutional clients outside the U.S. and intermediary clients that changed their investment objectives, repositioned their strategy allocations, or experienced investment performance challenges within their portfolio.

From an investment performance standpoint, 76% of the T. Rowe Price mutual funds across their share classes outperformed their comparable Lipper averages on a total return basis for the three-year period ended December 31, 2013, 77% outperformed for the five-year period, 82% outperformed for the 10-year period, and 71% outperformed for the one-year period.

In addition, T. Rowe Price stock, bond and blended asset funds that ended the quarter with an overall rating of four or five stars from Morningstar account for 78% of the firm’s rated funds’ assets under management. The performance of our institutional strategies against their benchmarks was substantially similar. The firm’s target-date retirement funds continue to deliver very attractive long-term performance, with 100% of these funds outperforming their comparable Lipper averages on a total return basis for the three- and five-year periods ended December 31, 2013.

Dalbar recognizes MassMutual Retirement Services statements

For the third consecutive year, the participant statements issued in MassMutual’s Retirement Services Division’s defined benefit (DB) and defined contribution (DC) plans have been recognized as a “champion” in DALBAR’s annual Trends and Best Practices in Investor Statements report.

In the recently released report, MassMutual’s DB and DC investor statements earned DALBAR’s ‘Excellent’ designation, while the firm’s DB statements garnered a first place ranking.

According to DALBAR, MassMutual’s DB and DC financial statements adhere to the 5 C’s of user-friendly financial communication:

  • Clarity that allows consumers to easily understand the information being provided
  • Content that is comprehensive, detailed and useful
  • Choices that empower consumers in making financial decisions to accomplish their goals
  • Customer Service that promotes a positive relationship with the firm
  • Creative Design that supports all communication with appropriate visual elements

A fiduciary standard could help RIAs get 401(k) business: TD Ameritrade

If the fiduciary standards for advisers to defined contribution retirement plans go up next summer—and the Department of Labor seems intent on it—the change could open up opportunities for registered investment advisers, who are already held to that standard.

So says the latest TD Ameritrade Institutional Advisor Survey.

But relatively few RIAs have targeted the $5 trillion DC market. According to the survey, 62% of RIAs service 10 or fewer plans and 19% work with no plans. Only 6% percent of retirement plan advisers are RIAs.

That might be changing. Half of the survey’s respondents see an opportunity to expand in the retirement business and are currently directing time and resources towards that goal. Another 19% said they don’t advise plans today, but probably will in the near future.

The U.S. retirement market is estimated at $21.8 trillion. Analysts expect it to reach $23.8 trillion by 2017.Retirement plan assets over the past five years increased at a faster pace than non-retirement assets because Americans contribute to their workplace plans with every paycheck across market cycles, TD Ameritrade said.

In addition to their familiarity with the fiduciary standard, RIAs have another potential leg-up on retirement business: half of RIAs surveyed said 10% or more of their clients are business owners, who could steer their companies’ retirement plans to RIAs. Business owners can also provide referrals.

RIAs say they have not capitalized on this opportunity for several reasons:

  • 60% cited a lack of time or resources.

  • 42% cited compliance and regulatory requirements.

  • 38% said they lacked business relationships with third party administrators (“TPAs”) or recordkeepers.

  • 30% were not sure of the opportunity.

  • 25% said they lacked the tools needed to service retirement plans.

Half of RIAs said they would like to understand retirement plan compliance and regulation better; more than half said they want more education about the retirement market. About 58% seek referrals to third-party plan administrators and recordkeepers. More than a third would want ongoing practice management support, the survey showed.

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Fidelity tops two lists of ‘top-of-mind’ retirement brands

Even financial advisors who claim to focus on the defined contribution (DC) plan market still hold most of their total AUM with individual clients, according to a new study by Cogent Reports, a unit of Market Strategies International.

As a result, “their perceptions of and exposure to investment managers and DC plan providers are largely shaped by their retail relationships and experience,” Cogent Reports said in a release about its new Retirement Plan Advisors Trends report.

If that’s true, Cogent said in the release, then DC providers with strong retail businesses may be better equipped to compete for those advisors’ DC plan business. In other words, full-service DC providers would have an advantage over DCIO (DC-investment only) asset managers and recordkeeping specialists. 

According to Cogent Reports, among financial advisors who manage at least $10 million in DC assets:

  • Only 35% report that DC plan assets comprise one-fourth or more of their total book.
  • Just 15% of these plan producers have $50 million or more in DC plan assets under management.

All of which helps explain the rankings on the lists below. Starting with Fidelity, these represent the ten firms that plan advisors are most likely to name when prompted to recall DC asset managers and service providers, according to the Cogent survey. These firms evidently have the most brand equity among advisers.

Cogent Plan Advisor Brand chart

The message for DCIO firms and pure recordkeepers is: Think like a retailer. “Emphasize what DC plan advisors care most about: best-in-class advisor service and support, good value for the money, and strong risk management practices and fiduciary support,” said Linda York, an author of the study.

Cogent’s list of IRA destinations

Of 4,170 investors who opted-in to a recent Cogent Reports online survey and who said they have over $100,000 in investable assets and at least one “old” employer-sponsored retirement account, 9% said they were likely to roll over their old account to an IRA within the next 12 months.

That was one of the findings of Cogent’s latest Investor Rollover Assets in Motion study. One in four (24%) investors has at least one retirement plan with a previous employer where a significant portion (25%) of his/her investable assets still resides, the study also found. Separately, Cogent calculated that U.S. investors will roll over about $280 billion from employer plans to IRAs in 2014.

Investors’ criteria for choosing a rollover provider were:

  • Low fees and expenses.
  • An easy process.
  • Brand reputation.
  • Existing relationship with the financial services company.

Changing employers and retiring remained the top triggers for initiating a rollover. Consistent with previous Cogent reports, Fidelity Investments and Vanguard—two of the largest full-service retirement plan providers as well as two of the largest IRA custodians—retained their status as the top desired providers for rollover IRAs. Three firms—E*TRADE, Ameriprise and J.P. Morgan Chase—strengthened their positions among the top 10.

Cogent Rollover chart

© 2014 RIJ Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.