The Office of the Chief Actuary (part of OSFI) has released its eighth actuarial study, titled Technical Aspects of the Financing of the Canada Pension Plan, complete with OSFI’s usual dollop of patronizing paternalistic Panglossian pablum:
The review panel expressed concern that most readers would be unduly distressed that the Canada Pension Plan (CPP or the “Plan”) is not expected to ever be even one-third funded. As such, the panel recommended minimizing or removing “point-in-time” funded status indicators from the actuarial report and to focus instead on the fact that the adequacy and stability of the steady-state contribution rate is the critical tool for judging the sustainability of the CPP, and that the funded ratio (ratio of assets to liabilities), if kept in the report, is at most an indicator of the projected mprovement in the funded level. This paper was thus written with the purpose of analyzing and comparing the financing of the CPP using different measures, in particular, the unfunded obligations (liabilities less assets) and funded ratios of the Plan under various closed and open group methodologies, including a methodology more consistent with that used for occupational defined benefit pension plans.
Let’s donate the Chief Actuary to Europe – he can help advise them on what to do about those CDS-trading terrorists, who caused the Greek crisis all by themselves.
Speaking of the Greek crisis:
Europe’s stalemate over possible aid for debt-encumbered Greece deepened as European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet spoke out against offering low- interest loans for which the Greek government has pressed.
Trichet’s demand for stringent terms and German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s push for sanctions against nations that breach deficit limits heightened the chance that Greece will leave a March 25-26 summit empty-handed. That could force Prime Minister George Papandreou to decide whether he’s ready to fulfill his threat and turn instead to the International Monetary Fund.
Looks like there might finally be some action on the Fannie & Freddie front:
U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said the government should end the “ambiguity” over the government’s involvement in mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
“Private gains can no longer be supported by the umbrella of public protection, capital standards must be higher and excessive risk-taking must be appropriately restrained,” Geithner said in testimony prepared for the House Financial Services Committee that was obtained today by Bloomberg News. The hearing is scheduled for tomorrow at 10 a.m. in Washington.
Volume jumped up as PerpetualDiscounts got hammered again, losing 36bp, while FixedResets continued to show strength, gaining 3bp which took yields on the latter down to 3.42%. Volatility was also pretty good.
HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices These values reflect the December 2008 revision of the HIMIPref™ Indices Values are provisional and are finalized monthly |
|||||||
Index | Mean Current Yield (at bid) |
Median YTW |
Median Average Trading Value |
Median Mod Dur (YTW) |
Issues | Day’s Perf. | Index Value |
Ratchet | 2.69 % | 2.77 % | 56,523 | 20.62 | 1 | -0.0476 % | 2,054.7 |
FixedFloater | 5.09 % | 3.21 % | 45,194 | 19.92 | 1 | -0.6047 % | 3,106.8 |
Floater | 1.95 % | 1.74 % | 47,415 | 23.19 | 4 | 0.1982 % | 2,370.0 |
OpRet | 4.90 % | 2.84 % | 96,061 | 0.19 | 13 | -0.0328 % | 2,309.2 |
SplitShare | 6.40 % | 6.41 % | 125,527 | 3.67 | 2 | 0.1769 % | 2,131.9 |
Interest-Bearing | 0.00 % | 0.00 % | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | -0.0328 % | 2,111.5 |
Perpetual-Premium | 5.93 % | 6.02 % | 120,049 | 13.78 | 7 | -0.4554 % | 1,875.9 |
Perpetual-Discount | 5.96 % | 6.00 % | 181,177 | 13.88 | 71 | -0.3649 % | 1,772.8 |
FixedReset | 5.35 % | 3.42 % | 346,549 | 3.68 | 43 | 0.0339 % | 2,206.4 |
Performance Highlights | |||
Issue | Index | Change | Notes |
HSB.PR.D | Perpetual-Discount | -2.72 % | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 20.35 Evaluated at bid price : 20.35 Bid-YTW : 6.18 % |
TD.PR.O | Perpetual-Discount | -1.84 % | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 21.30 Evaluated at bid price : 21.30 Bid-YTW : 5.79 % |
SLF.PR.A | Perpetual-Discount | -1.57 % | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 19.40 Evaluated at bid price : 19.40 Bid-YTW : 6.16 % |
BNS.PR.K | Perpetual-Discount | -1.34 % | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 20.55 Evaluated at bid price : 20.55 Bid-YTW : 5.94 % |
GWO.PR.H | Perpetual-Discount | -1.30 % | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 19.75 Evaluated at bid price : 19.75 Bid-YTW : 6.17 % |
GWL.PR.O | Perpetual-Premium | -1.18 % | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 24.87 Evaluated at bid price : 25.20 Bid-YTW : 4.79 % |
TD.PR.P | Perpetual-Discount | -1.07 % | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 22.89 Evaluated at bid price : 23.05 Bid-YTW : 5.78 % |
SLF.PR.B | Perpetual-Discount | -1.07 % | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 19.45 Evaluated at bid price : 19.45 Bid-YTW : 6.20 % |
IAG.PR.E | Perpetual-Premium | -1.03 % | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 24.69 Evaluated at bid price : 24.91 Bid-YTW : 6.04 % |
MFC.PR.C | Perpetual-Discount | 1.07 % | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 18.90 Evaluated at bid price : 18.90 Bid-YTW : 6.00 % |
Volume Highlights | |||
Issue | Index | Shares Traded |
Notes |
BAM.PR.N | Perpetual-Discount | 72,991 | YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Limit Maturity Maturity Date : 2040-03-22 Maturity Price : 17.43 Evaluated at bid price : 17.43 Bid-YTW : 6.86 % |
RY.PR.R | FixedReset | 71,140 | National crossed 49,500 at 28.05. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2014-03-26 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 27.97 Bid-YTW : 3.26 % |
RY.PR.X | FixedReset | 67,137 | RBC crossed 28,000 at 28.10. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2014-09-23 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 28.10 Bid-YTW : 3.44 % |
CM.PR.L | FixedReset | 65,521 | National crossed 49,300 at 28.43. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2014-05-30 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 28.46 Bid-YTW : 3.24 % |
TD.PR.K | FixedReset | 44,670 | National crossed blocks of 19,400 and 10,000, both at 28.35. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2014-08-30 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 28.36 Bid-YTW : 3.25 % |
NA.PR.N | FixedReset | 40,300 | HSBC sold 10,000 to RBC at 26.55. YTW SCENARIO Maturity Type : Call Maturity Date : 2013-09-14 Maturity Price : 25.00 Evaluated at bid price : 26.51 Bid-YTW : 3.65 % |
There were 62 other index-included issues trading in excess of 10,000 shares. |
Preferred Shares & Annuities
Tuesday, March 16th, 2010An Assiduous Reader writes in and says:
I am not particularly comfortable in this field of investment decision-making, so take everything below with a grain of salt and do your own research. But I’ll give it a stab! Any corrections or elaborations will be gratefully received.
But first, let me say that the Inquiring Reader is on the right track. Preservation of Income – as opposed to Preservation of Capital – is what preferred shares are all about.
Morningstar publishes life annuity rates; a sixty-year-old male is looking at an annual payment of about 7.2% of principal; at 70 it’s about 9%; and at 75 it’s about 10.8%.
According to Standard Life, the income is taxed as regular income:
To estimate how much of the annuity payment is return of capital, I used the Canadian Business Life Expectancy Calculator with the following data:
So at age 60, we’ll say 20-years to go; 13 years to go at age 70; and 10 years left at age 75.
Some quick work with MS-Excel, with the assumption that the capital is all gone at the end of the annuity results in required yields of 3.6%, 2.3% and 1.4%. We’ll summarize this in another table:
Holy smokes! I’ve definitely made a mistake somewhere … could be the assumptions, the math, or the fact that I didn’t go into the insurance business.
However, before we leap wholeheartedly into PerpetualDiscounts as life-annuity substitutes, let’s take a look at the risks:
Credit Risk: Annuities are a far more senior claim on the insurers than preferred shares, especialy since – as far as the insurers are concerned – an annuity is a claim on the operating companies assets, while a preferred share is a claim on the parent. It is entirely possible that in times of trouble, a preferred shareholder could get nothing while an annuity holder could get paid in full … even in the absence of a government bail-out.
Return Order Risk: An annuity withdraws principal on a steadily increasing basis – even if that basis has to be calculated on a post hoc basis. Thus, if we are performing a direct comparison, we also have to withdraw principal from our preferred share portfolio on a steady basis. This means we are exposed to Order of Returns Risk. And that’s even before we consider:
Principal Evaporation Risk: With an annuity, the insurance company takes the risk that you will last longer than expected, and covers it with their chances that other clients will make up for it. With a preferred share portfolio – or any investment portfolio – you’re the one stuck with that risk.
Call Risk: Say preferred share yields fall dramatically and your shares get called. This will definitely foul up your long-term returns because your returns after the call date will reflect the coupon of your PerpetualDiscount, and not the initial yield – and that’s even before you account for frictional costs of the process.
As noted in the comments, this is overstated. Your yield will go down but, to at least some extent, your capital will have increased on a call. However:
Tax Risk: The tax regime for dividends could change, eliminating at least some of the dividend advantage
Inflation Risk: This will be about the same for both strategies, but you do have the option to buy an indexed annuity, whereas there are no indexed preferred shares at present. At some point, a deeply discounted FixedReset with a microscopic spread against five-year Canadas might be functionally equivalent, but we don’t have any of those yet. Other floating rate perpetuals (Ratchet, FixedFloater, Floater) might be considered equivalent, but then you have basis risk (either prime or five-year Canadas vs. inflation) and extant non-FixedReset Floating Rate issues don’t have sterling credit quality.
All in all, the risks are significant, but the returns are certainly juicy. I would advise that annuities are good for the bare-bones-beans-on-a-hotplate portion of retirement income, while preferred shares – and other investments – provide the income that you spend in Florida.
There are probabily mistakes in the above – this is not a topic I spend a lot of time on. My job is to take the investor’s allocation to preferreds and do a better job with it than he could himself – not to decide on the allocation. Any commentary will be be appreciated.
Update: See also Lifetime Financial Advice: Human Capital, Asset Allocation, and Insurance, Ibbotson, Milevsky, Chen & Zhu, ISBN 978-0-943205-94-6
Update, 2010-3-17: See also the So you are going to buy an annuity. With what? discussion on Financial Webring Forum.
Update, 2010-3-17: Another good article is Annuity Analytics: How Much to Allocate to Annuities? by Moshe A. Milevsky.
Update, 2010-3-19: There’s a good table in Milevsky’s Annuitization: If Not Now, When?:
Assuming 40m/60f (static) Annuity 2000 Table at 6% net interest.
Annuitant
Pricing Interest
Rate
(in Basis Points = 1/100 %)
Update, 2010-3-25: Interesting conclusions and charts in Kaplan’s Asset Allocation with Annuities for Retirement Income Management
Posted in Reader Initiated Comments | 8 Comments »