Key Takeaways
- • CalPERS, the US$300-billion California Public Employees' Retirement System, terminated its US$4-billion Absolute Return Strategies (ARS) Program, which comprised 24 hedge funds and six hedge fund-of-funds, citing excessive costs, complexity, and poor scalability relative to the pension fund's size.
- • Interim Chief Investment Officer Ted Eliopoulos stated that "hedge funds are certainly a viable strategy for some, but...when judged against their complexity, cost and the lack of ability to scale at CalPERS' size, the ARS Program is no longer warranted."
- • CalPERS' decision reflects a fundamental shift in institutional investor priorities post-2008 financial crisis, moving away from absolute return strategies toward investments emphasizing low cost, transparency, and liquidity—characteristics that have accelerated the adoption of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in large pension portfolios.
- • The pension fund's withdrawal from hedge funds was driven partly by transparency challenges; explaining the performance and value of 30-plus hedge fund products on CalPERS' balance sheet proved operationally burdensome for an organization committed to accountability.
- • The decision by the largest U.S. public pension fund signals potential broader institutional retreat from hedge fund allocations, particularly among plan sponsors reassessing whether hedge fund complexity and fees justify their strategic benefit in diversified portfolios.
Summary
The California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS), managing US$300 billion in assets, announced the elimination of its US$4-billion Absolute Return Strategies Program, marking a significant shift in how the nation's largest public pension fund approaches alternative investments. The decision, disclosed in September 2014, terminated positions across 24 individual hedge funds and six hedge fund-of-funds structures. According to CalPERS' interim Chief Investment Officer Ted Eliopoulos, the rationale centered on a straightforward cost-benefit analysis: "Hedge funds are certainly a viable strategy for some, but, at the end of the day, when judged against their complexity, cost and the lack of ability to scale at CalPERS' size, the ARS Program is no longer warranted."
The divestment reflects a fundamental recalibration of institutional investment philosophy in the post-2008 environment. A decade prior, plan sponsors actively pursued absolute return strategies, attracted by the promise of solid returns during bull markets coupled with downside protection during downturns. However, following the financial crisis, institutional priorities shifted decisively toward simplicity, cost efficiency, and operational transparency. CalPERS' experience exemplifies this transition: the pension fund found that managing and explaining the performance of 30-plus hedge fund products created an unsustainable transparency burden for an organization committed to public accountability. Beyond reputational concerns, the operational complexity and associated costs failed to justify the strategic value delivered to a mega-cap institutional investor.
This decision has broader implications for the hedge fund industry and alternative asset management. The three characteristics now dominating institutional investor preferences—low cost, transparency, and liquidity—align precisely with the structural advantages of exchange-traded funds. The rise of ETFs in institutional portfolios directly correlates with the declining appeal of hedge funds among pension funds facing similar pressures around fee management and regulatory transparency. CalPERS' withdrawal from the asset class signals that even proven hedge fund strategies may face headwinds as large institutional investors increasingly question whether complexity and cost structures are justified by marginal alpha generation, particularly in an environment where simpler, lower-cost alternatives offer comparable risk-adjusted returns with superior liquidity and transparency profiles.
The divestment reflects a fundamental recalibration of institutional investment philosophy in the post-2008 environment. A decade prior, plan sponsors actively pursued absolute return strategies, attracted by the promise of solid returns during bull markets coupled with downside protection during downturns. However, following the financial crisis, institutional priorities shifted decisively toward simplicity, cost efficiency, and operational transparency. CalPERS' experience exemplifies this transition: the pension fund found that managing and explaining the performance of 30-plus hedge fund products created an unsustainable transparency burden for an organization committed to public accountability. Beyond reputational concerns, the operational complexity and associated costs failed to justify the strategic value delivered to a mega-cap institutional investor.
This decision has broader implications for the hedge fund industry and alternative asset management. The three characteristics now dominating institutional investor preferences—low cost, transparency, and liquidity—align precisely with the structural advantages of exchange-traded funds. The rise of ETFs in institutional portfolios directly correlates with the declining appeal of hedge funds among pension funds facing similar pressures around fee management and regulatory transparency. CalPERS' withdrawal from the asset class signals that even proven hedge fund strategies may face headwinds as large institutional investors increasingly question whether complexity and cost structures are justified by marginal alpha generation, particularly in an environment where simpler, lower-cost alternatives offer comparable risk-adjusted returns with superior liquidity and transparency profiles.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.