How should the return-seeking portfolio be allocated within an LDI framework, and what determines its size relative to the liability-hedging portfolio?

Question

AcadiFi · Accepted Answer

The return-seeking portfolio (RSP) is the portion of pension assets allocated to generate returns in excess of liability growth. Its size, composition, and risk budget depend on the plan's funded status, risk tolerance, and time horizon. **Determining the Split — Funded Ratio Drives Everything** The allocation between the LHP and RSP is primarily determined by the plan's **funded ratio** (assets / liabilities) and the sponsor's **risk tolerance**: | Funded Ratio | LHP Allocation | RSP Allocation | Rationale | |---|---|---|---| | < 80% (underfunded) | 40-50% | 50-60% | Must take risk to close the gap | | 80-100% | 50-70% | 30-50% | Balance hedging and growth | | 100-110% (fully funded) | 70-85% | 15-30% | Protect surplus, moderate growth | | > 110% (overfunded) | 85-100% | 0-15% | Lock in surplus, minimize risk | As the funded ratio improves, the plan should follow a **glide path** — systematically shifting assets from the RSP to the LHP. **Worked Example — Northfield Corporate Pension:** Plan assets: $3.8B. Liabilities: $4.2B. Funded ratio: 90.5%. | Component | Allocation | Amount | Target Return | |---|---|---|---| | LHP | 55% | $2.09B | Match liability returns (~5.2%) | | RSP | 45% | $1.71B | Liability return + 2.5% = 7.7% | **RSP Asset Class Allocation:** | Asset Class | RSP Weight | Expected Return | Role | |---|---|---|---| | Global equities | 45% | 8.5% | Growth engine | | Private equity | 15% | 11.0% | Illiquidity premium | | Real estate | 10% | 7.5% | Inflation hedge + income | | High yield credit | 12% | 6.8% | Spread income | | Hedge funds | 10% | 6.5% | Diversification, low correlation | | Emerging market debt | 8% | 7.2% | Yield enhancement | | **Blended RSP** | **100%** | **~8.2%** | | **The Glide Path Concept:** \`\`\`mermaid flowchart LR A["Funded Ratio
80%"] --> B["RSP: 55%
LHP: 45%"] B --> C["Funded Ratio
90%"] C --> D["RSP: 40%
LHP: 60%"] D --> E["Funded Ratio
100%"] E --> F["RSP: 25%
LHP: 75%"] F --> G["Funded Ratio
110%"] G --> H["RSP: 10%
LHP: 90%"] \`\`\` **Key Considerations:** 1. **Contribution policy** — If the sponsor can make additional contributions, the RSP can be smaller (less reliance on investment returns). 2. **Plan maturity** — Mature plans with mostly retired participants have shorter duration liabilities and less capacity for RSP risk. 3. **Regulatory constraints** — Some jurisdictions mandate minimum LHP allocations or restrict RSP asset classes. 4. **Liquidity needs** — Near-term benefit payments must be funded from liquid assets, limiting the RSP's allocation to illiquid alternatives. 5. **Correlation with sponsor** — If the sponsor's business is cyclical, the RSP should avoid assets correlated with the sponsor's fortunes to prevent double-hit risk. Explore the complete LDI allocation framework in our CFA Level III course.

How should the return-seeking portfolio be allocated within an LDI framework, and what determines its size relative to the liability-hedging portfolio?

Master Level III with our CFA Course

Related Questions

Practice Questions