The P&I 1000...Assets of the 1,000 largest U.S. retire-ment funds increased to $11.32 trillion in the year ended Sept. 30 at a slower pace — 2.9% — than in 2018 when assets grew

The P&I 1000

Our annual look at the largestretirement funds

Assets of the 1,000 largest U.S. retire-ment funds increased to $11.32 trillion in the year ended Sept. 30 at a slower pace — 2.9% — than in 2018 when assets grew by 6.4%, due to the lingering effect of poor market performance in the fourth quarter of 2018.

Over the five years ended Sept. 30, as-set growth of the combined defined ben-efit and defined contribution plans of the 1,000 largest retirement funds was 25%, lagging the 31.8% increase over the same time frame ended Sept. 30, 2018, results of Pensions & Investments’ annu-al survey showed.

Defined benefit plans within the top 1,000 funds were up 2.2% for the year to $7.06 trillion, or 62%, of total universe assets. Defined contribution plan assets were up 4% to $4.26 trillion as of Sept. 30.

Among the 200 largest retirement funds in P&I’s universe, growth of DC plan assets continued to outpace that of DB plans in both the one- and five-year periods ended Sept. 30.

Assets managed in DB plans by the

February 10, 2020 PIonline.com $50 an issue / $350 a year

T H E I N T E R N AT I O N A L N E W S P A P E R O F M O N E Y M A N A G E M E N T

Lingering shadow of 2018’s debacle hurts fund growth

THE P&I 1000 OVERVIEW

Tepid asset boost of 2.9% for top plans blamed on fourth-quarter market fall

By CHRISTINE WILLIAMSON

SOUND BI TE P&I’s new feature is chock full of numbers‘By the numbers’ is a debut offering from Pensions & Investments’ with data on market returns and pension funds. Page 13

More on the largest retirement funds CalPERS bucking asset allocation trend of peers. Page 3 New crop of CIOs unlikely to fail in next market debacle. Page 3 Fixed income rises as more DB plans shed risk. Page 3 Managers used by the top funds are familiar names. Page 3 Target-date funds in DC plans remain voracious. Page 17 Growth in alternatives illustrates promise of returns. Page 17 DC plans don’t seem concerned about ESG priorities. Page 41 For the full report, go to pionline.com/sponsors2020

The Securities and Exchange Com-mission is, again, asking its regulated entities, including money managers, to voluntarily disclose their diversity poli-cies, practices and workforce data. Since its first attempt to collect this data in 2018, the agency has taken additional measures to improve the response rate, which has so far been tepid.

Surveys have been sent to the first group of potential respondents while all others will receive the “diversity as-sessment report” by November, the

agency confirmed.“The SEC has taken steps that will

hopefully get more entities to share in-formation about efforts to enhance di-versity and inclusion in their organiza-tions,” said Pamela Gibbs, director of the SEC’s office of minority and women in-clusion, in a Jan. 28 email.

“At educational events and confer-ences hosted by industry trade associ-ations and professional organizations, we have encouraged regulated entities to conduct self-assessments of their diversity policies and practices and share their self-assessments with the

SEC,” Ms. Gibbs said. The commission’s Office of Minority

Investor and corporate groups around the world are weighing in on proposals from the Securities and Ex-change Commission that could dramat-ically change the rules for proxy advi-sory firms and how shareholder proposals are submitted.

On the investor side, voices are being raised from as far away as the Austra-lian Council of Superannuation Inves-tors, whose members represent $2.2 trillion in assets; the U.K.’s £10 billion ($13.1 billion) National Employment Savings Trust; and Dutch asset manag-er Robeco. These organizations are raising concerns, if not outright alarms, that if the proposals go through unchanged, shareholder rights — and corporate governance best practices — hang in the balance.

On the corporate side, groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce argue that tighter regulation of proxy advisers to curb conflicts of interest, lack of transparency and unchecked errors is overdue, as are the

SEC makes another push to get diversity data from managers

Investors flooding SEC with views on proxy, shareholder proposals

Governance Regulation

By DANIELLE WALKER

By HAZEL BRADFORD

TELL US: Pamela Gibbs said the SEC wants managers to share their self-assessments.

OPPOSE: Amy Borrus sees ‘corporate fury’ as a reaction to today’s heightened scrutiny.

The coronavirus that originated in the city of Wuhan at the end of December and quickly circled the globe has left asset managers in China and Hong Kong spending more time at home, awaiting signs that steps taken by Beijing to contain the threat to public health are bearing fruit.

How soon progress on that front emerges will

determine whether the hit to China’s economy from the outbreak can be con-fined to the first quarter and then, as many anticipate, mostly offset by rebounding consumption and produc-tion later in the year.

On that score, Beijing’s latest daily statistics on the health crisis are offering some grist for the mills of bulls.

On Feb. 7, China’s National Health Commission said it confirmed 3,143 new coronavirus cases over

Outbreak of coronavirus paralyzes China’s managers, who sit and wait

Investing

Falling number of new cases gives hope that market will bounce back

By DOUGLAS APPELL and CHRISTINE WILLIAMSON

| SEE PROPOSALS ON PAGE 45

SEE DIVERSITY ON PAGE 47

SEE CORONAVIRUS ON PAGE 46 SEE FUNDS ON PAGE 44

Illus

trat

ion

by T

hom

Sev

alru

d

MORE ON THE CORONAVIRUS

Managers provide relief for victims of coronavirus in China. Page 8

STILL EARLY: Market watchers are seeing promising signs that the infections are being contained but realize ‘we are not really out of the woods’ yet.

Geo

vien

So/

SO

PA Im

ages

/Lig

htR

ocke

t

STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT BOARD’S DAVID VILLA: ‘What we learned in the crisis is we need to build a race car for a racetrack that is 20% tight curves and 80% straightaway.’ Page 3

Defined benefit plans shifted more of their overall portfolios into fixed income during the year ended Sept. 30, according to Pensions & Investments’ latest survey of the 1,000 largest U.S. retirement plan sponsors.

This likely served investors well as bond indexes were simultane-ously up about 10% during that time.

The DB plans of the 200 largest U.S. plan sponsors, in particular, sought to derisk and increased al-locations to liability-driven invest-ment strategies, and also targeted higher income, reporting more as-sets in private credit and emerging market debt, the survey found.

Among the DB plans of the larg-est 200 plan sponsors, assets in LDI investments grew 16.7% to $109.8 billion during the year ended Sept. 30. LDI assets among this group

continued to grow after charting 19.3% growth over the year ended Sept. 30, 2018, with $94.1 billion in assets. These plans also signifi-cantly increased their exposure to emerging market debt as assets in these strategies grew 67.9% to $39.8 billion, while assets in private credit grew 61.5% to $26 billion over the year.

As of Sept. 30, DB plans of the largest 200 plan sponsors had, on average, 24.5% of their total portfo-lio in domestic fixed income, com-pared to 23.9% the year prior. These DB plans had 2.8% of their total portfolio in global/international fixed income as of the end of Sep-tember, up from 2% a year earlier, P&I’s annual survey found.

Large corporate DB plans, in particular, have looked for ways to diversify their fixed-income portfo-lios, which might include looking at private debt or emerging market debt strategies, said Jon Pliner, a New York-based senior director, in-vestments, and head of delegated portfolio management in the U.S. at Willis Towers Watson PLC.

Pensions & Investments February 10, 2020 | 3

Most-used managers: BlackRock, the most-used manager by both DB and DC plans, would have ranked fourth for its DC mentions alone. Blackstone was the most-used alternatives manager.

*Based on P&I money manager survey as of Dec. 31, 2018. Source: Pensions & Investments Research CenterCompiled and designed by Charles McGrath and Gregg A. Runburg

A peek behind the curtainA look into the managers and service providers who work for the 200 largest U.S. retirement plan sponsors reveals a top-heavy distribution of the usual suspects, according to P&I’s survey as of Sept. 30. The data reflect broader trends that have generally favored low-cost providers which typically achieve savings through scale.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200AQR

WellingtonPIMCO

OaktreePrudential

BlackstoneVanguard

J.P. MorganState Street Global

BlackRock

Mixed growth: Of the most-used managers, Vanguard and AQR saw the most growth* in institutional assets. Despite lower growth, BlackRock is still the largest manager by assets.

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

AQRWellingtonPIMCOOaktreePrudentialBlack-stone

VanguardJ.P.Morgan

State StreetGlobal

BlackRock

Most-used consultants: Callan and Aon were the consultants most mentioned by the 200 largest retirement plans. Callan had the most DC plans as clients, with Aon heavier in DB.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24Cambridge

VerusWilshire

Segal MarcoMercerMeketa

RVKNEPC

AonCallan

Most-used custodians: State Street was the most-used custodian, capturing the largest share of DC plans. BNY Mellon, however, was more frequently used by DB plans.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

FidelityJ.P. Morgan

Northern TrustBNY MellonState Street

Times mentionedBy DB plansBy DC plans

Times mentionedBy DB plansBy DC plans

Times mentioned By DB plans By DC plans

5-year annual growth rateMedian of top 25 managers

As CalPERS officials guide the plan toward a new four-year asset allocation cycle in 2022, a Pensions & Investments’ analysis reveals that the plan has been bucking a trend among other U.S. pension plans — moving more as-sets into equities and fixed income rather than cutting those asset classes in favor of al-ternative investments.

The $384.4 billion California Public Em-ployees’ Retirement System, Sacramento, had 80% of its portfolio invested in stocks and bonds as of Sept. 30, according to data from P&I’s annual survey of the largest U.S. retirement plans. That was up from 68% as of Sept. 30, 2016, when the board began the process leading up to the adoption of its lat-est asset allocation.

Some 18% of its assets were in alternatives as of Sept. 30, down from 21.8% in 2016. Only real estate, accounting for 11% of assets, in-

creased from Sept. 30, 2016, when it stood at 9.1% of assets.

By comparison, the pension plans of the

top 200 plan sponsors surveyed had 72.1% in equities and fixed income as of Sept. 30.

CalPERS officials declined to be inter-

viewed for this story. However, since he joined CalPERS as chief investment officer in Janu-ary 2019, Yu “Ben” Meng has promoted invest-ing in private equity and private credit. CalP-ERS has an 8% target to private equity but a current allocation of 6.9% in the asset class.

“We need private equity to be successful, we need more of it, and we need it sooner rather than later,” Mr. Meng said at a March investment committee meeting.

More recently, Mr. Meng guided a discus-sion on the topic of private credit, noting that private debt was currently not an asset class in the system’s portfolio. “I think that’s some-thing we overlooked in the past, particularly given the changes in regulation after the global financial crisis,” he said late last year. “So currently, it’s not in our portfolio. We think it should be.”

CalPERS typically conducts an asset-lia-bility study every four years and a midcycle review every two years. CalPERS’ latest asset allocation went into effect July 1, 2018.

CalPERS’ most recent strategic asset allo-cation increased its equity allocation to 50%

CalPERS walking its own path on asset allocationTHE P&I 1000 CALPERS

Pension fund moves counter to peers with equity and bonds

By ARLEEN JACOBIUS

Many of the largest U.S. pension plans have new faces at the chief investment officer’s desk since the global financial crisis.

Data from Pensions & Invest-ments show that of the 20 largest U.S. DB plans, 13 CIOs did not hold this position at their plan in 2008.

So, given that many large plans’ CIOs weren’t in their positions during the crisis and in fact have only been in their leadership roles during a bull market, are they pre-pared for a downturn, or even an-other 2008-level financial crisis? Sources with whom P&I spoke said yes, provided they have enough li-quidity and systems in place to not only weather the storm but be pro-active in seeking out opportunistic investments.

“Many plans are in a better posi-tion today understanding their portfolios and taking measures,” said Michael Comstock, a partner at Aon PLC’s investing consulting business in Chicago.

Investment consultants have been working with their pension plan clients to stress-test their portfolios in a number of macro-economic scenarios to show how they would perform in a downturn.

“We’ve been very proactive to ensure clients aren’t complacent,” Mr. Comstock added. “Times have been good for investors for the last couple of years.”

And several plans are being pro-active to ensure they’re ready for the crisis next time.

James H. Grossman Jr., CIO of the $58 billion Pennsylvania Public School Employees’ Retirement Sys-

New crop of CIOs unlikely to fail in next market flop

THE P&I 1000 POST-CRISIS READINESS

By JAMES COMTOIS

SEE POST-CRISIS ON PAGE 42

SURPRISE! Jay V. Kloepfer said ‘no one expected’ fixed income to perform so well.

THE P&I 1000 FIXED INCOME

Fixed income increases as more plans shed risk

By DANIELLE WALKER

SEE CALPERS ON PAGE 42

LDI, income strategies cited as major reasons for defined benefit shift

YES, PLEASE: Yu ‘Ben’ Meng has been a staunch advocate of increasing private equity and private credit for CalPERS.

SEE FIXED INCOME ON PAGE 44

Thom

as B

roen

ing

16 | February 10, 2020 Pensions & Investments

T H E LARGEST RETIREMENT FUNDSWhat’s insideTHE FUNDSChange in assets by category 17

The largest retirement funds/sponsors 18

The largest funds by category 21

Assets of the top 200 fundsby category 21

The largest funds by type 22

Assets of the top 200 fundsby type 22

Average asset mixes 23

Aggregate asset mixes 25

Number of funds among the top 200 using strategy cited 27

How the data were compiled 27

DB assets by investment vehicle 28

DEFINED BENEFITFunds among the top 200 with DB assets in hybrid plans 28

Funds with the most DB assets managed internally 28

Funds with the most DB assets in equities 28

Funds with the most DB assets in fixed income 28

Funds with the most DB assets in REITs 28

Funds with the most DB assets in inflation-protected securities 28

Funds with the most DB assets in bank loans 28

Funds with the most DB assets in factor-based strategies 28

Funds among the top 200 with DB plans using ESG factors 29

Funds among the top 200 with DB plans using an external cybersecurity vendor 29

DEFINED CONTRIBUTIONTarget-date funds remain voracious 17

Passive bonds displaying vibrance despite era of go-go stock market 30

Growth of target-date strategies inDC plans 30

Growth of indexed bonds inDC funds 31

The largest DC funds by type 30

Funds with DC plans offering auto enrollment 30

Funds with DC plans offering auto escalation 30

Funds with DC plans offering white-label options 30

Funds with the most DC assets in target-date strategies 31

Funds with DC plans offering stand-alone retirement income options 31

Funds with DC plans using an external cybersecurity vendor 31

Funds with the most DC assets in passive equity 31

Funds with the most DC assets in inflation-protected securities 31

Funds with the most DC assets in REITs 31

ALTERNATIVESGrowth refl ects confi dence in returns 17

Growth of venture capital in DB funds 27

Growth of infrastructure in DB funds 27

Funds with the most DB assets in alternatives 29

Funds with the most DB assets in hedge funds 29

MORE ONLINETo view the complete report, including a full data set, go to pionline.com/sponsors20

The 2020 P&I 1000 at a glanceAssets are in billions as of Sept. 30.

Top 1,000 assets

$11,321.12018: $11,002.7

Top 1,000 DB assets

$7,059.32018: $6,905.1

Top 1,000 DC assets

$4,261.82018: $4,097.6

Top 200assets

$8,172.72018: $7,919.7

Top 100assets

$6,634.62018: $6,467.0

Top 50assets

$5,158.52018: $5,012.6

Top 25assets

$3,755.22018: $3,666.1

2019assets Change

Internally managed* $1,417.9 9.37%

Domestic equity (active & indexed) $517.8 0.21%

Domestic fixed income (active & indexed) $438.4 5.28%

International equity (active & indexed) $193.7 22.44%

International fixed income (active & indexed) $28.2 47.64%

Global equity (active & indexed) $51.0 -12.37%

Alternative investments $54.0 6.09%

Passive indexed equity $943.9 0.08%

Passive indexed bonds $145.4 6.05%

Enhanced indexed equity $41.2 -18.25%

Enhanced domestic indexed bonds $35.3 18.06%

Real estate equity $354.9 6.07%

REITs $34.9 -33.01%

2019assets Change

High yield $68.9 -1.43%

Bank loans $13.1 24.76%

Inflation-protected securities $63.7 -15.74%

Cash $87.3 12.65%

Domestic active equity $325.1 -19.73%

Domestic active bonds $802.9 6.25%

International active equity $422.8 -3.27%

Global/international active bonds $81.6 9.53%

Global equity (active & indexed) $231.7 -13.03%

Emerging markets (active & indexed) $208.9 9.09%

Equity $169.1 0.77%

Debt $39.8 67.93%

Factor-based equity $99.6 159.38%

LDI investments $109.8 16.68%

2019assets Change

Hedge funds $154.9 -3.19%

Direct investments $134.5 -2.39%

Funds of funds $20.4 -8.11%

Commodities $15.4 -15.38%

Private equity $400.0 8.96%

Venture capital $43.0 4.88%

Buyouts $219.3 5.13%

Mezzanine $3.3 10.00%

Distressed debt $18.7 -6.03%

Private credit/debt $26.0 61.49%

Energy $30.8 -3.75%

Infrastructure $33.9 18.12%

Hybrid plans $194.2 9.29%

Employer contributions $136.1 -4.09%

Benefits paid $265.5 2.47%

* Total is greater because some funds did not provide breakouts. Historical data may include retroactive updates.

Top 200 DB


Top 200 DB assets

$5,590.12018: $5,451.4

Top 200 DC assets

$2,582.62018: $2,468.3

Change in assets by category Assets are in billions for years ended Sept. 30.

TOP 1,000

201920182017201920182017201920182017201920182017201920182017201920182017

TOP 200 TOP 200CORPORATE

TOP 200PUBLIC

TOP 200UNION

TOP 200MISCELLANEOUS

$10,341.5

$11,002.7$11,321.1

$7,452.3$7,919.7

$8,172.7

$2,607.5 $2,798.7 $2,902.3

$3,831.9 $4,040.9 $4,124.9

$128.4 $145.8 $151.3

$884.5 $934.3 $994.2

Target-date funds continue their march through the invest-ment lineups of defined contri-bution plans, snapping up assets and raising allocation percent-ages in Pac-Man-like fashion.

Target-date funds offered by corporate sponsors grabbed 25.3% of the total asset alloca-tions among 10 broad catego-ries for the 12 months ended Sept. 30, 2019, up from 19.9% the year before, according to Pensions & Investments’ annual survey of the largest retirement plans. Among public DC spon-sors, the asset allocation per-

centage was flat at 21.6%. The public and private com-

pany data reflects the DC com-ponents of the 200 largest U.S. retirement plans tracked by P&I.

Among these plans, aggre-gate off-the-shelf target-date fund assets committed to de-fined contribution rose 45.5% to $64.6 billion in the latest survey vs. $44.4 billion in the previous survey. Over five years, these as-sets grew by 139%.

In addition, custom target-

date funds in DC plans ad-vanced 19.5% to $238.7 billion in the current survey vs. $199.7

billion in the previous survey. Over five years, the custom

Target-date funds remain voracious

THE P&I 1000 DEFINED CONTRIBUTION

Allocation in corporate plans increases to 25.3% as participants continue love affair with strategy

By ROBERT STEYER

Institutional investors are continuing to move capital into alternative investment and real asset sectors, with assets in in-frastructure, private equity and real estate gaining in the one- and five-year periods ended Sept. 30.

Venture capital saw relatively modest gains this year at 4.9%, to $43 billion, ac-cording to Pensions & Investments’ latest

survey of the 1,000 largest U.S. retirement plan sponsors.

All but one of the 14 investors with ven-ture capital portfolios of $1 billion or more witnessed gains, most in the double digits for the year. However, the consultant to the plan with the most defined benefit assets in venture capital, the $100 billion pension plan of the Washington State Investment Board, Olympia, has combined venture cap-

ital with growth equity since 2017. Wash-ington State reported $4.4 billion in venture capital as of Sept. 30.

Overall, Pensions & Investments’ data re-flects an ongoing macroeconomic trend, in-dustry insiders said.

“The private markets are taking share from the public markets,” said Scott Voss, Boston-based managing director at Har-bourVest Partners LLC.

Investors continue to turn to alternative investments because they believe they will get a higher return than in the public markets. Indeed, with private companies choosing to

Growth reflects confidence in return outlookTHE P&I 1000 ALTERNATIVES

Plans believe alternatives offer better opportunity in long term

By ARLEEN JACOBIUS

SEE DC FUNDS ON PAGE 30

SEE ALTS ON PAGE 27

Thom Sevalrud

2019 assets Change

Passive indexed equity $539.3 0.09%

Passive indexed bonds $59.2 17.93%

REITs $4.9 11.36%

Inflation-protected secs. $8.9 5.95%

Commodities $1.7 54.55%

Target-date strategies* $326.6 21.37%

Custom $238.7 19.53%

Off-the-shelf $64.6 45.50%

Contributions $62.4 13.66%

Employer $19.0 13.10%

Employee $43.4 13.91%

401(k) $669.1 3.40%

Profit sharing $23.8 72.46%

ESOP $24.5 1.24%

457 $133.5 4.95%

401(a) $69.7 2.05%

403(b) $43.8 -15.12%

Other DC $614.7 5.06%

Top 200 DCSTILL STRONG: Winfield Evens sees no end to the dominance of target-date funds due to their status as a qualified default investment alternative.

Mic

hael

A.

Mar

cott

e

DC FUND DATA

Specific defined contribution tables begin on page 30.

ALTERNATIVES DATA

Data on alternatives in DB plans can be found on page 29.


T H E LARGEST RETIREMENT FUNDS

The largest retirement funds/sponsors Ranked by total assets, in millions, as of Sept. 30.

D B A S S E T M I X

Rank2018 rank Sponsor Assets Change

Total DBassets

Total DCassets Stocks Bonds Cash Other Key person

1 1 Federal Retirement Thrift $601,030 3.8% $601,030 Ravindra Deo, Executive Director

2 2 California Public Employees $384,435 2.0% $382,669 $1,766 48.9% 31.1% 0.8% 19.2% Yu Ben Meng, CIO (DB); Christine Reese (DC)

3 3 California State Teachers $243,311 5.7% $242,130 $1,181 49.6% 17.0% 1.9% 31.5% Christopher Ailman, CIO (DB); Sandy Blair, DC Director (DC)

4 4 New York State Common $215,424 1.0% $215,424 53.4% 23.9% 0.7% 22.0% Anastasia Titarchuk, CIO

5 5 New York City Retirement $208,458 3.8% $208,458 49.8% 32.9% 0.6% 16.7% Alex Done, Deputy Comptroller-Bureau of AM & CIO

6 6 Florida State Board $173,769 -0.5% $162,510 $11,259 55.7% 22.2% 1.3% 20.8% Ash Williams, Executive Director & CIO (DB); Daniel Beard, Chief of DC Programs (DC)

7 7 Texas Teachers $157,632 2.9% $157,632 37.3% 14.4% 0.6% 47.7% Jase Auby, CIO

8 9 Boeing $129,545 4.7% $63,218 $66,327 Andrew Ward, VP & CIO

9 8 AT&T $125,611 1.2% $57,518 $68,093

10 12 Washington State Board $119,992 6.7% $99,916 $20,076 32.9% 21.5% 0.1% 45.5% Allyson Tucker, CIO

11 10 New York State Teachers $119,663 -0.4% $119,663 57.3% 24.0% 2.5% 16.2% Thomas K. Lee, Executive Director & CIO

12 11 Wisconsin Investment Board $116,877 2.0% $111,485 $5,392 52.0% 24.0% 24.0% David Villa, Executive Director & CIO (DB); Matt Stohr, Administrator (DC)

13 13 North Carolina $114,631 2.9% $102,396 $12,235 31.3% 27.2% 13.2% 28.3% Jeff Smith, Interim CIO & Director-Fixed Income (DB); Loren De Mey, Assistant Director (DC)

14 14 IBM $105,712 2.4% $52,083 $53,629 7.3% 80.7% 12.0% Rick Klutey, Managing Director & CIO

15 15 Ohio Public Employees $101,852 1.1% $100,152 $1,700 40.1% 25.4% 0.6% 33.9% Paul Greff, CIO

16 16 California University $95,493 2.4% $69,676 $25,817 47.5% 22.5% 8.0% 22.0% Jagdeep Singh Bachher, CIO & VP-Investments

17 17 General Motors $86,894 -1.8% $62,250 $24,644

18 19 Virginia Retirement $86,718 3.4% $82,739 $3,979 32.4% 28.3% 0.8% 38.5% Ronald D. Schmitz, CIO (DB); Laura Pugliese, Portfolio Manager-DC Plans (DC)

19 20 Michigan Retirement $83,908 2.5% $74,753 $9,155 38.4% 13.6% 3.6% 44.4% Jon M. Braeutigam, CIO

20 18 New Jersey $82,983 -1.1% $78,464 $4,519 46.9% 18.5% 7.3% 27.3% Corey Amon, Director

21 21 Oregon Public Employees $82,404 1.4% $80,044 $2,360 35.8% 21.5% 42.7% John D. Skjervem, CIO (DB); Mark Selfridge, Data Analyst (DC)

22 24 Minnesota State Board $80,805 4.1% $70,690 $10,115 63.0% 21.0% 0.8% 15.2% Mansco Perry III, Executive Director & CIO

23 22 General Electric $79,599 -1.7% $54,503 $25,096 37.0% 39.0% 4.9% 19.1% Matt Zakrzewski, Managing Director-Benefit Plans

24 26 Lockheed Martin $79,470 3.8% $36,705 $42,765 43.1% 24.1% 3.1% 29.7% Paul Colonna, President & CIO-LMIMCO

25 23 Ohio State Teachers $78,988 -0.2% $77,332 $1,656 52.5% 20.6% 1.7% 25.2% Mike Nehf, Executive Director

26 25 Georgia Teachers $78,782 1.6% $78,782 68.6% 30.6% 0.8% Charles W. Cary Jr., CIO

27 27 Massachusetts PRIM $76,001 2.9% $76,001 44.2% 20.2% 1.2% 34.4% Michael G. Trotsky, Executive Director & CIO

28 28 United Parcel Service $72,253 9.1% $47,008 $25,245 34.2% 42.2% 3.9% 19.7% Ernie Caballero, CIO

29 37 Kaiser $68,574 27.6% $42,099 $26,475 44.0% 30.0% 3.0% 23.0% Vyvian Heath, Man. Dir.-Fixed Inc. (DB); Rajiv Mathur, Sr. Dir.-Pub. Eq., DC Plans & Inv. Oper. (DC)

30 29 United Nations Joint Staff $67,770 3.3% $67,770 56.8% 29.0% 2.5% 11.7% Sudhir Rajkumar, Representative of the Secretary-General OIM)

31 32 Ford Motor $62,997 9.2% $43,051 $19,946 5.3% 75.9% 2.0% 16.8% Erin Rohde, CIO

32 30 Bank of America $62,181 3.7% $20,311 $41,870 28.1% 66.0% 0.3% 5.6%

33 31 Tennessee Consolidated $60,757 4.1% $52,933 $7,824 51.8% 26.8% 0.6% 20.8% Michael Brakebill, CIO (DB); Kaci Lantz, DC Director (DC)

34 39 Northrop Grumman $59,763 12.8% $30,570 $29,193 40.6% 29.3% 7.4% 22.7% Raj Chandhok, VP-Investments & Trust Admin. (DB); Karim Gowani, Manager-Investments (DC)

35 43 United Technologies $59,051 17.6% $30,795 $28,256 27.0% 55.0% 18.0% Robin L. Diamonte, VP & CIO

36 33 Los Angeles County Employees $58,811 2.9% $58,811 39.8% 27.5% 2.0% 30.7% Jonathan I. Grabel, CIO

37 34 Pennsylvania School Employees $58,008 5.2% $58,008 17.0% 35.0% -7.8% 55.8% James H. Grossman Jr., CIO

38 41 Maryland State Retirement $54,134 3.4% $54,134 36.5% 26.8% 0.3% 36.4% Andrew Palmer, CIO

39 35 Colorado Employees $53,837 -0.4% $49,290 $4,547 55.2% 23.5% 0.4% 20.9% Amy C. McGarrity, CIO

40 40 Wells Fargo $53,700 1.5% $10,500 $43,200 Thomas B. Hooley, SVP & Managing Director

41 38 Verizon $53,189 -0.3% $19,148 $34,041 Brady Connor, President & CIO-VIMCO

42 42 Illinois Teachers $52,252 0.8% $52,252 34.5% 20.9% 2.2% 42.4% Richard W. Ingram, Executive Director

43 45 FedEx $46,483 4.9% $23,320 $23,163

44 46 J.P. Morgan Chase $45,673 3.1% $16,225 $29,448 15.0% 70.0% 3.0% 12.0% Ameeta Gosain, CIO-DB Plan (DB); Daniela Nese (DC)

45 44 Missouri Schools & Education $45,235 1.9% $45,235 44.3% 22.5% 0.4% 32.8% Craig A. Husting, CIO

46 47 Nevada Public Employees $44,629 4.5% $44,629 64.0% 25.4% 0.3% 10.3% Steve Edmundson, CIO

47 49 Teamsters, Western Conference $44,029 5.4% $44,029 41.5% 30.0% 1.0% 27.5% Alan D. Biller, CEO, Alan Biller and Associates

48 48 Illinois Municipal $42,668 0.6% $42,668 57.6% 29.5% 0.7% 12.2% Dhvani Shah, CIO

49 53 Arizona State Retirement $41,401 3.6% $41,401 43.8% 10.3% 1.2% 44.7% Karl Polen, CIO

50 51 State Farm $41,151 1.8% $27,716 $13,435

51 52 Raytheon $40,322 0.6% $20,785 $19,537 Scott A. Lupkas, VP-Pension Investments

52 50 Alabama Retirement $40,303 -1.0% $38,029 $2,274 68.1% 13.7% 8.6% 9.6% David G. Bronner, CEO

53 54 Utah State Retirement $39,800 1.2% $33,600 $6,200 Daniel D. Andersen, Executive Director

54 58 Delta Air Lines $39,259 4.3% $14,998 $24,261 Jon Glidden, Managing Director-Pension Investments

55 56 Johnson & Johnson $39,201 3.1% $20,481 $18,720 Neil Roache, CIO

56 55 South Carolina Public Employees $39,055 1.6% $31,841 $7,214 45.7% 15.6% 5.6% 33.1% Geoffrey Berg, CIO

57 57 Nokia USA $37,166 -1.5% $28,702 $8,464 John Hickey, VP-Global Benefits

58 62 Indiana Public Retirement $36,658 5.5% $31,019 $5,639 22.5% 27.2% 1.5% 48.8% Scott Davis, CIO

59 61 Connecticut Retirement $35,937 3.0% $35,937 47.9% 27.9% 1.6% 22.6% Shawn T. Wooden, State Treasurer

60 60 Honeywell $35,722 -0.2% $20,515 $15,207 37.0% 48.0% 1.0% 14.0% Harsh Bansal, VP-Investments

61 65 Iowa Public Employees $34,011 5.4% $34,011 39.3% 30.7% 0.9% 29.1% Karl C. Koch, CIO

62 63 Alaska Retirement $33,870 1.3% $26,978 $6,892 47.0% 23.2% 1.3% 28.5% Bob G. Mitchell, CIO

63 64 Pennsylvania Employees $33,156 1.8% $29,453 $3,703 55.8% 14.8% 4.2% 25.2% James G. Nolan, Acting CIO (DB); Alicia James, CFO (DC)

64 67 Walmart $33,066 3.7% $33,066 Adam Stavisky, SVP, U.S. Benefits

65 59 Exxon Mobil $32,403 -9.9% $12,354 $20,049 H.M. Comer, Manager-Benefits Finance & Investment

66 72 American Airlines $32,269 6.2% $12,373 $19,896 56.5% 32.2% 11.3% Ken Menezes, Managing Director-Asset Management

67 69 Texas County & District $32,112 3.5% $32,112 34.0% 26.0% 2.0% 38.0% Casey Wolf, CIO



D B A S S E T M I X


Total DBassets


68 66 Texas Employees $31,939 -0.7% $28,519 $3,420 42.0% 28.0% 3.0% 27.0% Tom Tull, CIO (DB); Nora Alvarado, Director-Voluntary Income Plans (DC)

69 71 Pfizer $30,862 1.0% $14,241 $16,621

70 70 Mississippi Employees $30,531 -0.5% $28,660 $1,871 61.0% 20.0% 1.0% 18.0% Charles Nielsen, Interim CIO

71 73 San Francisco City & County $30,129 2.7% $26,481 $3,648 33.6% 13.2% 1.6% 51.6% William J. Coaker Jr., CIO (DB); Diane Chui Justen, DC Plan Manager (DC)

72 74 Texas Municipal Retirement $29,984 4.8% $29,984 35.7% 16.4% 2.0% 45.9% T.J. Carlson, CIO

73 68 Chevron $28,909 -7.3% $9,467 $19,442

74 81 General Dynamics $28,673 8.2% $12,922 $15,751

75 77 Exelon $27,828 2.8% $18,516 $9,312 33.0% 42.0% 1.0% 24.0% Douglas Brown, SVP & CIO

76 83 Caterpillar $27,808 8.5% $15,834 $11,974 26.4% 71.9% 0.8% 0.9% Martin Rumbold, Investment Administrator (DB); Trisha Romero (DC)

77 79 Citigroup $27,547 2.4% $12,886 $14,661 15.6% 52.8% 7.7% 23.9% Pantelis Apessos, Man. Dir.-Strat. & Invest. (DB); Leonardo Rodriguez, Dir. & Sr. Inv. Officer (DC)

78 136/190 CVS Health $27,328 138.2% $6,284 $21,044 Carol A. DeNale, SVP & Treasurer

79 82 Federal Reserve Employees $27,088 5.6% $17,221 $9,867 William G. Clark, CIO

80 Dow $26,815 $14,458 $12,357

81 78 Shell Oil $26,266 -2.9% $15,019 $11,247

82 80 3M $26,237 -1.8% $16,180 $10,057

83 76 FCA US $25,878 -6.5% $18,406 $7,472

84 85 United Continental Holdings $25,870 5.6% $4,580 $21,290 Eric Harder, Managing Director-Corporate Finance

85 84 New York State Deferred Comp. $25,707 2.2% $25,707 David E. Fischer, Executive Director

86 75 National Railroad $25,407 -10.7% $25,400 $7 William J. Carr III, CEO & CIO

87 96 Microsoft $25,200 16.1% $25,200 George Zinn, Corporate VP & Treasurer (DC)

88 100 Walt Disney $24,908 18.6% $14,509 $10,399 Lawrence Goldsmith, VP-Pension & Investments

89 86 PepsiCo $24,871 4.9% $14,507 $10,364

90 90 National Electric $24,015 3.8% $14,949 $9,066 52.1% 22.6% 0.7% 24.6% Monte Tarbox, Exec. Dir.-NEBF Investments (DB); Kevin McCormack, Sr. Investment Officer (DC)

91 36 Corteva $23,962 -55.5% $16,687 $7,275 35.0% 49.8% 1.5% 13.7% Valerie J. Sill, President & CEO, DuPont Capital

92 88 Illinois State Board $23,958 2.8% $19,257 $4,701 49.6% 31.9% 0.7% 17.8% Johara Farhadieh, Executive Director & CIO

93 89 Los Angeles Fire & Police $23,920 2.7% $23,920 50.5% 20.7% 5.8% 23.0% Tom Lopez, CIO

94 91 PG&E $23,630 2.8% $17,333 $6,297 Ted Huntley, Director

95 95 World Bank $23,461 7.5% $23,461 John F. Gandolfo, Director & CIO

96 87 Procter & Gamble $23,005 -2.7% $1,961 $21,044

97 92 Louisiana Teachers $22,925 0.7% $20,599 $2,326 47.1% 17.0% 0.6% 35.3% Philip Griffith, CIO (DB); Davorio D. Stevenson, Director-Investment Operations (DC)

98 93 Merck $22,782 1.0% $12,165 $10,617 60.6% 38.1% 1.3% Timothy Dillane, Executive Director-Pension Investments

99 94 Illinois State Universities $22,163 0.7% $19,546 $2,617 53.3% 24.9% 1.3% 20.5% Douglas C. Wesley, CIO

100 97 New York City Deferred Comp. $22,162 2.9% $22,162 Georgette Gestely, Director

101 98 Prudential Financial $22,087 2.6% $13,070 $9,017 8.5% 62.4% 0.8% 28.3% Gail Maytin, CIO

102 101 Intel $21,505 3.6% $1,514 $19,991

103 99 Kansas Public Employees $21,495 1.9% $20,355 $1,140 49.5% 24.8% 4.3% 21.4% Elizabeth Miller, CIO (DB); Arlen Zentner, DC Plan Officer (DC)

104 106 HP $21,349 9.0% $12,017 $9,332

105 228/368 CommonSpirit Health $20,780 108.3% $9,031 $11,749 Alyssa Rieder, VP & CIO

106 110 Deloitte $20,759 13.3% $6,689 $14,070 26.0% 54.8% 3.8% 15.4% Mary Ellen Stocks, CIO

107 102 Kentucky Teachers $20,135 -0.4% $20,135 61.8% 16.6% 1.3% 20.3% Gary Harbin, Executive Secretary

108 107 Deere $20,100 5.2% $12,400 $7,700 Jeffrey A. Trahan, VP-Pension Fund & Investments

109 124 Costco Wholesale $20,000 17.6% $20,000 Jay Tihinen, AVP-Benefits

110 105 Wespath, UMC $19,970 0.8% $8,954 $11,016 41.5% 48.4% 0.1% 10.0% David Zellner, CIO

111 104 National Rural Electric $19,942 0.5% $8,659 $11,283 61.0% 27.0% 1.0% 11.0% John Szczur, VP-Investment Strategy & Performance

112 103 Southern Co. $19,928 0.1% $12,780 $7,148 55.1% 23.0% 1.7% 20.2%

113 121 Abbott Laboratories $19,800 14.5% $8,974 $10,826

114 108 Consolidated Edison $19,644 3.3% $15,311 $4,333 42.9% 39.1% 0.8% 17.2% Robert Hoglund, SVP & CFO

115 176/283 L3Harris Technologies $19,632 63.6% $6,702 $12,930

116 111 Ernst & Young $19,629 7.2% $8,239 $11,390 45.9% 41.7% 2.2% 10.2% Walter Kress, CIO

117 112 Operating Engineers International $18,920 3.9% $18,920 54.8% 28.3% 16.9% Michael Crabtree, CEO

118 115 Idaho Public Employees $18,806 4.1% $17,759 $1,047 60.5% 28.3% 0.5% 10.7% Robert M. Maynard, CIO

119 109 Duke Energy $18,678 1.7% $9,297 $9,381

120 113 FMR $18,501 1.8% $18,501

121 116 Georgia Employees $18,260 2.0% $16,333 $1,927 61.1% 27.4% 11.5% Charles W. Cary Jr., CIO (DB); Jim Potvin, Executive Director (DC)

122 118 Los Angeles City Employees $18,139 1.7% $18,139 55.5% 22.9% 1.1% 20.5% Rodney L. June, CIO

123 114 CenturyLink $18,002 -0.5% $10,729 $7,273 24.6% 46.3% 29.1%

124 120 Arkansas Teachers $17,584 1.4% $17,584 53.1% 16.0% 1.0% 29.9% G. Wayne Greathouse, Associate Director-Investments

125 119 HCA Holdings $17,500 0.0% $635 $16,865

126 128 Hawaii Employees $17,422 5.7% $17,422 49.7% 11.8% 3.6% 34.9% Elizabeth Burton, CIO

127 139 Nebraska Investment Council $17,261 14.9% $16,397 $864 58.7% 29.2% 12.1% Michael Walden-Newman, State Investment Officer

128 123 Oklahoma Teachers $17,237 1.1% $17,080 $157 59.8% 22.4% 1.1% 16.7% Tom Spencer, Executive Director

129 126 MetLife $16,882 -0.5% $9,798 $7,084 9.3% 81.4% 1.2% 8.1%

130 134 Orange County $16,755 5.6% $16,755 37.5% 16.6% 1.7% 44.2% Molly A. Murphy, CIO

131 147 Koch Industries $16,709 14.7% $7,489 $9,220

132 133 Eli Lilly $16,468 3.8% $9,118 $7,350 25.6% 15.9% 8.5% 50.0% Susan Ridlen, Assistant Treasurer

133 129 Oracle $16,460 0.1% $16,460 Peter Shott, VP-Human Resources

134 178 Sammons Enterprises $16,447 37.6% $16,447 CONTINUED ON PAGE 20




D B A S S E T M I X


Total DBassets


135 130 New Mexico Public Employees $16,356 1.0% $15,727 $629 33.1% 20.4% 0.8% 45.7% Dominic Garcia, CIO

136 138 Mayo Clinic $16,253 6.0% $9,324 $6,929

137 127 Liberty Mutual $16,104 -5.0% $8,066 $8,038

138 140 Partners HealthCare $16,083 7.6% $6,911 $9,172

139 131 West Virginia Investment $16,042 0.9% $16,042 51.7% 16.1% 0.2% 32.0% Craig Slaughter, Executive Director

140 125 New York City Teachers $16,023 -5.6% $16,023 Susan Stang, Director-Investment Administration

141 149 New York City MTA $16,005 10.2% $8,910 $7,095

142 117 International Paper $15,979 -10.4% $10,150 $5,829

143 132 Ohio Police & Fire $15,780 -0.7% $15,780 26.1% 31.7% 2.0% 40.2% Theodore G. Hall, CIO

144 137 BP America $15,609 1.0% $7,607 $8,002 20.0% 59.0% 1.0% 20.0% Mark Thompson, CIO & Director-Trust Investments, Americas

145 142 Los Angeles County Deferred $15,342 3.9% $15,342 Teresa Gee, DC Plan Investment Manager

146 141 Los Angeles Water & Power $15,232 3.1% $15,232 54.0% 23.9% 1.0% 21.1% Jeremy Wolfson, CIO

147 146 California Savings Plus $15,205 4.3% $15,205 Michelle Berklacich, Administrator

148 145 Maine Public Employees $14,941 1.9% $14,900 $41 29.9% 19.3% 0.3% 50.5% James Bennett, Acting CIO

149 144 Episcopal Church $14,929 1.4% $13,802 $1,127 Roger A. Sayler, Managing Director & CIO

150 150 Medtronic $14,922 3.2% $3,754 $11,168

151 154 Morgan Stanley $14,807 6.5% $3,104 $11,703

152 152 Blue Cross & Blue Shield $14,705 4.5% $5,818 $8,887 Jamey Sharpe, Execuitive Director & Chief Investment Executive

153 148 Ohio School Employees $14,629 0.5% $14,629 45.5% 15.8% 4.4% 34.3% Farouki A. Majeed, Director-Investments

154 153 Ohio Deferred Compensation $14,499 3.7% $14,499 Paul Miller, Asst. Director-Finance

155 143 Bayer $14,400 -2.3% $5,385 $9,015 38.7% 52.5% 0.3% 8.5% James K. Martin, Director-Trust Investments

156 156/779 Dominion Energy $14,313 5.7% $8,519 $5,794 William J. McHugh, Assistant Treasurer-Asset Management

157 159 PricewaterhouseCoopers $13,985 7.4% $3,394 $10,591

158 122 National Grid USA $13,787 3.2% $9,030 $4,757 Francine Kollydas, Director-Investment Management Department

159 155 BAE, NA $13,564 -1.3% $5,954 $7,610

160 174 1199SEIU National $13,515 12.4% $13,446 $69 Lorraine Monchak, CIO

161 194 Alphabet $13,477 18.6% $13,477

162 162 Toyota USA $13,419 4.4% $4,296 $9,123 Soo young Der, Manager-Investment Group

163 161 San Diego County $13,380 3.4% $13,380 47.7% 28.3% 24.0% Stephen C. Sexauer, CIO

164 157 New Mexico Educational $13,346 2.2% $13,346 32.6% 26.7% 1.1% 39.6% Bob Jacksha, CIO

165 167 Target $13,338 6.3% $4,236 $9,102 24.8% 45.7% 0.1% 29.4% Al Ezban, Director-Benefits Investments

166 164 IAM National $13,090 2.5% $12,511 $579 31.0% 35.0% 34.0% Jonathan S. Young, Director-Investments & 401(k) Plan

167 160 Bank of New York Mellon $13,071 0.8% $5,851 $7,220

168 168 Southwest Airlines $13,052 4.5% $13,052 Elaine Parham, Sr. Manager-Compensation

169 170 Cisco Systems $13,044 4.7% $13,044

170 197 American Electric $13,003 15.3% $8,091 $4,912 Jim Brown, Investment Specialist

171 173 USAA $13,000 7.5% $5,156 $7,844 Douglas Ward, CIO

172 166 Kroger $12,984 3.0% $3,369 $9,615 Chad Redmond, Investment Manager

173 179 UnitedHealth $12,972 10.1% $12,972

174 165 South Dakota $12,920 2.1% $12,460 $460 35.2% 17.6% 22.9% 24.3% Matt Clark, State Investment Officer

175 169 Kentucky Retirement $12,902 3.3% $12,902 37.7% 34.1% 3.8% 24.4% Rich Robben, CIO

176 195 Truist Financial $12,809 12.8% $7,919 $4,890 Jeffrey J. Schappe, CIO

177 163 U.S. Bancorp $12,794 0.0% $5,477 $7,317

178 151 Teamsters, Central States $12,734 -9.6% $12,734 11.7% 86.3% 1.1% 0.9% Pete Priede, Sr. Director

179 205/627 Cigna $12,700 17.3% $3,700 $9,000

180 172 National Elevator Industry $12,605 4.0% $8,586 $4,019

181 198 New York Life $12,562 11.5% $8,164 $4,398

182 171 Novartis US $12,552 1.6% $2,395 $10,157

183 189 Bristol-Myers Squibb $12,515 8.3% $6,166 $6,349 Scott Grisin, Assistant Treasurer

184 158 Altria $12,503 -4.2% $8,055 $4,448

185 177 Publix Super Markets $12,474 4.3% $12,474

186 182 Electrical Industry, Joint Board $12,398 5.8% $3,967 $8,431 45.0% 37.0% 18.0% Robert Ball, CIO

187 186 FirstEnergy $12,378 6.2% $8,331 $4,047 Bill Wang, Assistant Treasurer (DB); Jennifer Buchanan, Adviser-Investment Management (DC)

188 185 Roche USA $12,286 5.4% $3,533 $8,753 David McDede, VP & Treasurer

189 212 Comcast Holdings $12,261 16.8% $12,261 Lawrence J. Salva, SVP, Chief Accounting Officer & Controller

190 201 Cox Enterprises $12,119 9.6% $7,207 $4,912 Carol L. Larner, VP-Investments

191 181 Nationwide $12,064 2.9% $5,516 $6,548

192 184 PNC $12,021 3.1% $5,554 $6,467 50.0% 16.0% 11.0% 23.0%

193 196 Walgreens Boots Alliance $11,896 5.2% $11,896

194 187 Pentegra $11,855 1.9% $4,729 $7,126 27.6% 52.3% 0.1% 20.0% Scott Stone, CIO

195 204 Schlumberger $11,804 8.9% $4,763 $7,041 Gary Park, Director-Trust Investments

196 191 Michigan Municipal $11,715 2.7% $9,422 $2,293 51.8% 14.8% 10.2% 23.2% Jeb Burns, CIO

197 188 Montana Board of Investment $11,644 0.5% $11,644 47.0% 26.1% 3.2% 23.7% Dan Villa, Executive Director & Acting CIO

198 202 Accenture $11,572 5.2% $252 $11,320 98.0% 2.0%

199 200 Dell Technologies $11,534 3.7% $491 $11,043 Chris Johnson, Retirement Program Manager

200 175 Allstate $11,527 -4.2% $5,935 $5,592

Top 200 total $8,172,726



Rank Sponsor Assets Change Total DB Total DC

201 Oklahoma Public Employees $11,439 0.3% $10,264 $1,175

202 Louisiana State Employees $11,434 -2.4% $11,434

203 Textron $11,400 -3.1% $7,100 $4,300

204 Siemens USA $11,286 -28.8% $2,521 $8,765

205 Travelers $11,233 0.8% $4,184 $7,049

206 University of Pennsylvania $11,041 5.1% $2,042 $8,999

207 Huntington Ingalls $10,921 2.2% $6,370 $4,551

208 Tennessee Valley Authority $10,893 1.5% $8,133 $2,760

209 Deseret Mutual Benefit $10,890 6.0% $6,865 $4,025

210 Sacramento County $10,845 5.0% $9,715 $1,130

211 IMF $10,797 1.6% $10,797

212 Cargill $10,790 3.5% $2,965 $7,825

213 San Bernardino County $10,749 3.6% $10,749

214 Chicago Teachers $10,737 -2.1% $10,737

215 KPMG $10,706 7.3% $4,218 $6,488

216 Cook County Employees $10,696 2.2% $10,696

217 Arizona Public Safety $10,661 7.8% $10,547 $114

218 Presbyterian Church $10,547 0.4% $9,757 $790

219 Missouri State Employees $10,518 2.0% $8,166 $2,352

220 NTESS $10,475 -1.3% $6,234 $4,241

221 GlaxoSmithKline USA $10,414 -8.5% $3,619 $6,795

222 American Int’l Group $10,319 1.3% $4,419 $5,900

223 Delaware Public Employees $10,265 1.5% $10,265

224 Evangelical Lutheran Church $10,196 5.9% $10,196

225 General Mills $10,178 5.4% $6,458 $3,720

226 Emerson Electric $10,058 5.9% $4,771 $5,287

227 Marsh & McLennan $10,052 -3.3% $4,481 $5,571

228 Public Service Enterprise $10,006 -1.7% $6,238 $3,768

229 Sherwin-Williams $9,993 12.5% $1,320 $8,673

230 Sutter Health $9,854 5.5% $4,660 $5,194

231 Entergy $9,847 -2.3% $5,923 $3,924

232 Anthem $9,799 5.9% $2,269 $7,530

233 Nestle USA $9,781 -3.1% $4,500 $5,281

234 Rhode Island Employees $9,670 1.3% $8,487 $1,183

235 Massachusetts Def. Comp. $9,541 6.0% $9,541

236 Motorola Solutions $9,537 -2.3% $4,249 $5,288

237 AbbVie $9,456 15.7% $3,462 $5,994

238 Marriott International $9,386 28.7% $9,386

239 Reynolds Group $9,365 5.9% $6,884 $2,481

240 Boilermaker-Blacksmith $9,305 -7.6% $7,895 $1,410

241 NextEra Energy $9,284 5.1% $4,221 $5,063

242 ConocoPhillips $9,270 -10.6% $1,533 $7,737

243 Ascension Health $9,232 -0.4% $8,514 $718

244 Coca-Cola $9,229 -9.3% $5,373 $3,856

245 BASF USA $9,187 2.1% $3,119 $6,068

246 Harvard University $9,153 5.8% $1,862 $7,291

247 Arkansas Employees $9,150 -1.0% $9,150

248 Eaton $9,137 -0.8% $3,387 $5,750

249 New Hampshire Retirement $9,107 2.0% $9,107

250 UFCW Joint Trust, S. Calif. $9,045 1.8% $835 $8,210

251 Kraft Heinz $8,954 -5.3% $4,726 $4,228

252 Albertsons $8,924 2.5% $2,530 $6,394

253 Goldman Sachs $8,920 4.2% $892 $8,028

254 MIT $8,904 2.4% $3,740 $5,164

255 Motion Picture Industry $8,896 1.1% $3,767 $5,129

256 Sempra Energy $8,877 24.9% $4,295 $4,582

257 Southern California Edison $8,877 -0.6% $4,295 $4,582

258 Contra Costa County $8,854 0.8% $8,854

259 Northwell Health $8,854 67.9% $2,276 $6,578

260 Charter Communications $8,787 3.6% $3,263 $5,524

261 Johnson Controls $8,775 -4.3% $2,736 $6,039

262 Hewlett Packard Enterprise $8,765 -6.7% $8,765

263 Eversource Energy $8,748 2.9% $5,275 $3,473

264 Mars $8,716 2.6% $5,673 $3,043

265 WestRock $8,625 23.5% $5,005 $3,620

266 Trinity Health $8,572 5.5% $7,296 $1,276

267 D.C. Retirement Board $8,517 3.9% $8,517

268 Union Pacific $8,511 2.5% $4,361 $4,150


269 Apple $8,501 14.7% $8,501

270 Hartford Financial $8,458 1.9% $3,870 $4,588

271 Home Depot $8,445 2.6% $8,445

272 San Diego City $8,442 4.5% $8,442

273 Duke University $8,363 3.3% $1,792 $6,571

274 Alameda County $8,328 -1.5% $8,328

275 Reynolds American $8,309 -3.9% $6,252 $2,057

276 Phillips 66 $8,265 -2.5% $2,669 $5,596

277 Cleveland Clinic $8,221 6.5% $1,308 $6,913

278 Stanford University $8,124 1.2% $262 $7,862

279 Sanofi-Aventis $8,115 -2.5% $1,742 $6,373

280 Missouri Local Government $8,104 4.9% $8,104

281 DTE Energy $8,032 1.2% $5,134 $2,898

282 Parker-Hannifin $8,020 2.5% $2,960 $5,060

283 Leidos $7,910 6.4% $7,910

284 UNC-Chapel Hill $7,894 3.6% $7,894

285 Longshoremen ILWU-PMA $7,889 4.5% $5,873 $2,016

286 Goodyear Tire & Rubber $7,884 -2.2% $4,940 $2,944

287 SUPERVALU $7,877 3.0% $5,152 $2,725

288 United States Steel $7,874 -5.9% $5,516 $2,358

289 Burlington Northern Santa Fe $7,871 7.1% $2,649 $5,222

290 Wyoming Retirement $7,858 -13.6% $7,128 $730

291 Texas Instruments $7,856 -0.5% $1,207 $6,649

292 UBS Financial Services $7,736 2.3% $1,326 $6,410

293 NYU $7,718 13.1% $207 $7,511

294 Plumbers & Pipefitters Nat’l $7,666 4.9% $7,660 $6

295 UPMC $7,621 6.9% $2,536 $5,085

296 Sysco $7,590 4.3% $3,968 $3,622

297 HSBC USA $7,540 0.3% $3,596 $3,944

298 Macy’s $7,385 -1.8% $3,247 $4,138

299 Los Angeles City Def. Comp. $7,375 4.1% $7,375

300 Cummins $7,298 7.2% $3,320 $3,978

301 Danaher $7,268 2.8% $1,964 $5,304

302 McKinsey $7,264 8.9% $110 $7,154

303 Providence Health $7,228 3.6% $50 $7,178

304 Ameren $7,197 4.3% $4,610 $2,587

305 Fairfax County Retirement $7,126 -13.6% $7,126

306 MUFG Americas $7,116 4.0% $4,437 $2,679

307 YMCA $7,110 -1.7% $7,110

308 Aon $7,033 -0.7% $2,009 $5,024

309 Southern Baptist Convention $7,003 3.6% $7,003

310 Utah Higher Education $6,944 $6,944

311 Corning $6,894 2.1% $3,039 $3,855

312 Occidental Petroleum $6,863 96.4% $1,601 $5,262

313 Univ. of Southern California $6,832 6.5% $228 $6,604

314 Baxter International $6,826 -2.0% $4,138 $2,688

315 Michelin $6,820 0.5% $3,107 $3,713

316 Bridgestone Americas $6,814 5.2% $4,097 $2,717

317 American Express $6,808 -0.2% $1,094 $5,714

318 Weyerhaeuser $6,777 -8.6% $4,572 $2,205

319 Edward Jones $6,770 5.3% $6,770

320 Ingersoll-Rand $6,698 1.1% $1,430 $5,268

321 Philips Electronics $6,697 1.3% $1,898 $4,799

322 SunTrust $6,695 -2.8% $3,205 $3,490

323 Carpenters, New York City $6,677 4.3% $4,008 $2,669

324 Xcel Energy $6,667 -0.7% $3,210 $3,457

325 Carpenters, N. California $6,627 4.3% $3,888 $2,739

326 AstraZeneca U.S. $6,615 1.5% $1,241 $5,374

327 NFL Player Benefits $6,550 168.4% $2,535 $4,015

328 AECOM $6,524 2.4% $348 $6,176

329 CBS $6,504 -3.5% $2,646 $3,858

330 Amazon.com $6,500 34.9% $6,500

331 Yale University $6,474 6.2% $6,474

332 Lowes $6,456 -0.1% $6,456

333 Chubb $6,408 0.7% $3,246 $3,162

334 Willis Towers Watson $6,399 2.2% $3,058 $3,341

335 Cornell University $6,391 5.4% $6,391

CONTINUED ON PAGE 22

Funds by categoryAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30. Data in parentheses are previous year.

Public funds

50.5%(51.0%)

Corp. funds

35.5%(35.3%)

Misc. funds

12.2%(11.8%)

Union funds1.8%(1.9%)

Top 200 assets breakdown

The largest fundsCorporate fundsRank Fund Assets

1 Boeing $129,545

2 AT&T $125,611

3 IBM $105,712

4 General Motors $86,894

5 General Electric $79,599

6 Lockheed Martin $79,470

7 United Parcel Service $72,254

8 Kaiser $68,574

9 Ford Motor $62,997

10 Bank of America $62,181

Public fundsRank Fund Assets

1 California Public Empl. $384,435

2 California State Teachers $243,311

3 New York State Common $215,424

4 New York City Retirement $208,458

5 Florida State Board $173,769

6 Texas Teachers $157,632

7 Washington State Board $119,992

8 New York State Teachers $119,663

9 Wisconsin Invest. Board $116,877

10 North Carolina $114,631

Union fundsRank Fund Assets

1 Teamsters, Western Conf. $44,029

2 National Electric $24,015

3 Operating Engineers Int’l $18,920

4 1199SEIU National $13,516

5 IAM National $13,090

6 Teamsters, Central States $12,734

7 National Elevator Industry $12,605

8 Electrical Ind., Joint Board $12,398

Miscellaneous fundsRank Fund Assets

1 Federal Retirement Thrift $601,030

2 California University $95,493

3 United Nations Joint Staff $67,770

4 Federal Reserve Employees $27,088

5 National Railroad $25,407

6 World Bank $23,461

7 Illinois State Universities $22,162

8 CommonSpirit Health $20,780

9 Wespath, UMC) $19,970

10 National Rural Electric $19,942





336 Xerox $6,390 -10.2% $2,570 $3,820

337 WEC Energy Group $6,383 -0.7% $3,183 $3,200

338 Vanguard Group $6,350 7.0% $6,350

339 DXC Technology $6,327 -1.1% $3,367 $2,960

340 Arconic $6,295 3.0% $3,214 $3,081

341 ABA Retirement $6,293 -7.6% $6,293

342 Eastman Kodak $6,291 -2.5% $3,611 $2,680

343 Capital One Financial $6,246 4.7% $250 $5,996

344 ADP $6,237 -8.0% $1,837 $4,400

345 Tenet Healthcare $6,221 1.3% $6,221

346 Ecolab $6,198 3.1% $2,342 $3,856

347 UMWA Health & Retirement $6,195 4.8% $5,777 $418

348 Thermo Fisher Scientific $6,168 5.9% $1,205 $4,963

349 Mount Sinai $6,134 6.7% $22 $6,112

350 MassMutual $6,103 2.3% $2,661 $3,442

351 MITRE $6,093 2.8% $6,093

352 Rockwell Automation $6,083 -5.2% $2,808 $3,275

353 AXA Equitable Holdings $6,059 18.4% $2,491 $3,568

354 Intermountain Healthcare $6,051 1.3% $3,160 $2,891

355 Amgen $6,020 13.1% $6,020

356 Schneider Electric USA $6,015 -9.1% $1,714 $4,301

357 North Dakota State $5,931 1.7% $5,931

358 Michigan State University $5,864 3.6% $5,864

359 Colorado Fire & Police $5,860 5.3% $5,368 $492

360 J.C. Penney $5,813 0.7% $3,413 $2,400

361 Southwest Airlines Pilots $5,804 3.6% $5,804

362 Thomson Reuters $5,796 -9.9% $2,210 $3,586

363 Whirlpool $5,783 2.5% $3,010 $2,773

364 Siemens Healthineers USA $5,759 $1,018 $4,741

365 PPL $5,743 5.2% $3,966 $1,777

366 Ventura County $5,716 6.4% $5,716

367 Kellogg $5,697 -3.5% $3,403 $2,294

368 Ericsson $5,670 -3.2% $2,464 $3,206

369 Bechtel Global $5,667 -0.3% $5,667

370 Houston Police Officers $5,662 -0.6% $5,662

371 Frontier Communications $5,655 -4.6% $2,669 $2,986

372 National Sprinkler Local 669 $5,581 4.8% $3,803 $1,778

373 Sheet Metal National $5,570 5.1% $5,469 $101

374 Kimberly-Clark $5,538 -4.9% $1,572 $3,966

375 Broadcom $5,529 267.6% $5,529

376 Credit Suisse, USA $5,491 0.1% $1,006 $4,485

377 Booz Allen Hamilton $5,394 2.8% $5,394

378 Philadelphia Public Employees $5,382 5.2% $5,382

379 Jacobs Engineering $5,361 103.7% $301 $5,060

380 Marathon Petroleum $5,345 3.0% $1,803 $3,542

381 Milwaukee City $5,336 -0.5% $5,336

382 Chicago Deferred Comp. $5,335 4.1% $5,335

383 CSX $5,321 -4.0% $2,719 $2,602

384 Montgomery County $5,321 3.3% $4,321 $1,000

385 Sony Music Entertainment $5,320 15.5% $951 $4,369

386 GEICO $5,294 3.4% $1,501 $3,793

387 University of Chicago $5,285 2.9% $357 $4,928

388 Community Health $5,281 -6.9% $980 $4,301

389 ArcelorMittal USA $5,278 -1.8% $2,771 $2,507

390 PPG Industries $5,256 -2.4% $1,270 $3,986

391 Anheuser-Busch InBev $5,228 -4.1% $1,475 $3,753

392 Savannah River $5,214 2.0% $2,987 $2,227

393 WMATA Retirement $5,192 4.3% $5,192

394 Conagra Brands $5,190 6.6% $3,787 $1,403

395 LSC Communications $5,186 3.0% $3,965 $1,221

396 Progressive $5,170 9.9% $5,170

397 Becton, Dickinson $5,169 4.9% $1,547 $3,622

398 CNA Financial $5,151 4.8% $2,808 $2,343

399 Valero Energy $5,146 -1.2% $2,364 $2,782

400 UFCW, Atlanta $5,141 4.9% $5,141

401 Army & Air Force Exchange $5,121 5.9% $5,121

402 Halliburton $5,106 $76 $5,030

403 Saint-Gobain $5,091 6.2% $3,246 $1,845


404 Nissan USA $5,087 2.6% $1,703 $3,384

405 Boston Retirement $5,076 0.9% $5,076

406 Northwestern Mutual $5,057 -36.5% $1,950 $3,107

407 State Street $5,056 1.2% $955 $4,101

408 Carpenters, New England $5,053 11.0% $5,053

409 Steelworkers Pension $5,053 2.1% $5,053

410 Illinois Tool Works $5,042 -2.2% $1,752 $3,290

411 Qualcomm $5,029 2.7% $5,029

412 Deutsche Bank USA $5,012 0.9% $1,394 $3,618

413 Air Products & Chemicals $5,000 5.3% $2,830 $2,170

414 Unisys $4,991 -4.7% $3,482 $1,509

415 Colgate-Palmolive $4,986 -8.4% $1,917 $3,069

416 Robert Bosch $4,982 9.3% $1,895 $3,087

417 Manufacturers & Traders $4,956 4.6% $2,186 $2,770

418 American Honda Motor $4,940 4.7% $4,940

419 California Inst. of Technology $4,935 7.1% $4,935

420 Humana $4,933 -1.5% $4,933

421 Service Employees 32B & 32J $4,921 4.4% $3,371 $1,550

422 Eastman Chemical $4,918 -4.7% $1,882 $3,036

423 Memorial Sloan-Kettering $4,892 2.6% $1,333 $3,559

424 Fannie Mae $4,886 7.6% $2,264 $2,622

425 Fresno County $4,844 -0.5% $4,844

426 SAP America $4,839 6.8% $4,839

427 Battelle $4,827 4.9% $2,669 $2,158

428 Sprint $4,826 1.9% $1,602 $3,224

429 John Hancock $4,806 4.9% $2,764 $2,042

430 University of Rochester $4,778 3.6% $4,778

431 Saudi Arabian Oil $4,777 2.7% $2,159 $2,618

432 San Mateo County $4,767 5.7% $4,767

433 Vermont Pension $4,751 -11.9% $3,983 $768

434 Ball $4,734 28.4% $2,222 $2,512

435 Maryland Supplemental $4,725 14.4% $4,725

436 Pinnacle West $4,723 -2.0% $3,391 $1,332

437 Valvoline $4,718 5.2% $2,809 $1,909

438 Principal Financial $4,711 -0.4% $1,669 $3,042

439 Operating Eng. Local 3 $4,710 4.8% $4,379 $331

440 Inter-American Dev. Bank $4,700 5.9% $4,700

441 McKesson $4,675 5.3% $353 $4,322

442 Washington University $4,656 -5.6% $4,656

443 Nucor $4,654 5.3% $4,654

444 S&P Global $4,643 0.7% $1,744 $2,899

445 Carpenters, Southwest $4,640 2.9% $4,640

446 Florida Deferred Comp. $4,619 4.1% $4,619

447 Operating Engineers Midwest $4,613 4.9% $4,521 $92

448 XPO Logistics $4,577 0.6% $1,805 $2,772

449 NTCA $4,576 1.4% $2,516 $2,060

450 Vanderbilt University $4,564 3.6% $4,564

451 Kansas Regents $4,559 3.6% $4,559

452 Sony America $4,544 2.9% $795 $3,749

453 CMS/Consumers Energy $4,526 4.2% $2,831 $1,695

454 Carpenters, Chicago $4,523 4.7% $3,928 $595

455 Sentara Healthcare $4,523 8.4% $2,163 $2,360

456 Alcoa $4,508 -11.0% $3,507 $1,001

457 Campbell Soup $4,500 3.5% $3,204 $1,296

458 Louisiana Parochial Employees $4,485 4.3% $4,485

459 Quest Diagnostics $4,455 -0.1% $4,455

460 Insperity $4,445 10.7% $4,445

461 Phoenix City $4,445 4.3% $2,555 $1,890

462 Kern County Employees $4,434 4.3% $4,434

463 Major League Baseball $4,429 4.7% $3,791 $638

464 Kinder Morgan $4,390 2.9% $2,018 $2,372

465 Comerica $4,373 2.7% $2,857 $1,516

466 Norfolk Southern $4,370 -1.6% $2,326 $2,044

467 Amsted Industries $4,363 3.7% $182 $4,181

468 BJC HealthCare $4,344 8.4% $2,931 $1,413

469 Painters & Allied Trades $4,336 6.6% $3,736 $600

470 KeyCorp $4,335 2.9% $1,324 $3,011

471 ABB $4,324 36.7% $995 $3,329

Funds by typeAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30. Data in parentheses are previous year.

Defined benefit assets

68.4%(68.8%)

Defined contribution

assets31.6%(31.2%)

Top 200 assets breakdown

The largest funds

Defined benefit plansRank Fund Assets

1 California Public Empl. $382,669







8 Wisconsin Invest. Board $111,485


10 Ohio Public Employees $100,152

Defined contribution plansRank Fund Assets


2 AT&T $68,093

3 Boeing $66,327

4 IBM $53,629

5 Wells Fargo $43,200


7 Bank of America $41,870

8 Verizon $34,041

9 Walmart $33,066

10 J.P. Morgan Chase $29,448

Public DC plansRank Fund Assets

1 New York State Def. Comp. $25,707

2 New York City Def. Comp. $22,162


4 New York City Teachers $16,023

5 Los Angeles County Def. $15,342

6 California Savings Plus $15,205

7 Ohio Deferred Comp. $14,499



10 Minnesota State Board $10,115




472 Molson Coors Brewing $4,315 -2.6% $1,946 $2,369

473 Adventist Healthcare $4,301 3.7% $214 $4,087

474 ECA & Local 134 IBEW $4,298 5.0% $1,870 $2,428

475 Regions Financial $4,296 -1.6% $2,298 $1,998

476 Houston Firefighters $4,258 2.2% $4,258

477 Nike $4,246 3.6% $4,246

478 CenterPoint Energy $4,238 -1.8% $1,816 $2,422

479 AK Steel $4,230 -8.1% $1,964 $2,266

480 Winco Foods $4,185 3.6% $4,185

481 Alaska Air $4,177 3.4% $1,733 $2,444

482 University of Kentucky $4,173 3.6% $4,173

483 FM Global $4,147 5.1% $2,818 $1,329

484 Highmark $4,140 4.9% $2,469 $1,671

485 B&W Technical Y-12 $4,135 5.1% $2,662 $1,473

486 Capital Group $4,134 5.1% $2,698 $1,436

487 Louisiana Sheriffs $4,133 4.3% $4,133

488 Charles Schwab $4,118 2.3% $4,118

489 New York State Nurses $4,114 4.7% $4,114

490 PACCAR $4,114 -1.8% $2,257 $1,857

491 Hearst $4,100 4.3% $2,504 $1,596

492 Genuine Parts $4,095 1.3% $2,033 $2,062

493 Carpenters, New Jersey $4,090 4.0% $1,595 $2,495

494 Bechtel Marine Propulsion $4,082 -0.1% $2,190 $1,892

495 Lutherans - Missouri Synod $4,081 1.6% $3,538 $543

496 Atlanta City $4,075 4.2% $3,713 $362

497 Praxair $4,071 14.9% $2,160 $1,911

498 Northwestern University $4,062 6.0% $4,062

499 Food Lion $4,054 4.3% $1,185 $2,869

500 Baker Hughes $4,034 -1.8% $664 $3,370

501 Zurich American $4,013 $1,484 $2,529

502 SAG - Producers $3,988 4.3% $3,988

503 Maryland Optional $3,982 14.4% $3,982

504 Avangrid $3,955 0.5% $1,946 $2,009

505 Northern Trust $3,951 -1.8% $1,548 $2,403

506 RELX $3,942 1.5% $1,367 $2,575

507 Boston Scientific $3,918 7.9% $3,918

508 Sears Holdings $3,906 -23.5% $1,911 $1,995

509 Meijer $3,903 1.7% $2,694 $1,209

510 Archer Daniels Midland $3,902 -10.5% $1,442 $2,460

511 Boehringer Ingelheim $3,869 3.5% $1,735 $2,134

512 TD Bank $3,835 7.6% $527 $3,308

513 Burns & McDonnell $3,826 15.4% $12 $3,814

514 Health Care Service $3,821 6.7% $1,693 $2,128

515 Univ. of Missouri Curators $3,821 5.9% $3,821

516 McDonald’s $3,814 0.3% $3,814

517 Bakery & Confectionery $3,810 -8.8% $3,810

518 Voya Financial $3,802 -0.5% $1,785 $2,017

519 Guardian Life $3,782 2.5% $2,321 $1,461

520 Nashville & Davidson County $3,778 4.2% $3,434 $344

521 Tyco Electronics $3,778 1.3% $1,140 $2,638

522 Carpenters, Ohio $3,756 5.7% $3,405 $351

523 UFCW, Northern California $3,729 -10.3% $3,463 $266

524 Stryker $3,724 9.0% $3,724

525 American Nat’l Red Cross $3,723 4.5% $2,559 $1,164

526 Montefiore Medical Center $3,718 3.6% $28 $3,690

527 Triumph Group $3,700 3.1% $2,636 $1,064

528 Hallmark Cards $3,694 1.0% $583 $3,111

529 Laborers, Chicago & Vicinity $3,677 2.2% $3,677

530 Chicago Municipal Employees $3,659 -13.0% $3,659

531 San Jose Police & Fire $3,648 -0.3% $3,648

532 Emory University $3,633 4.6% $3,633

533 Nordstrom $3,623 3.1% $3,623

534 Pipefitters Local 597 $3,600 4.7% $2,252 $1,348

535 Celanese Americas $3,598 -2.1% $2,843 $755

536 Stanford Hospital $3,583 6.6% $186 $3,397

537 Boston University $3,580 4.5% $3,580

538 NiSource $3,571 3.1% $2,067 $1,504

539 Kentucky Deferred Comp. $3,564 4.1% $3,564


540 Ahold USA $3,554 -5.9% $1,007 $2,547

541 Dallas City Employees $3,554 -1.3% $3,554

542 Fluor $3,547 -3.1% $3,547

543 Mondelez International $3,539 -2.2% $1,676 $1,863

544 Directors Guild-Producer $3,513 -4.2% $1,724 $1,789

545 Hormel Foods $3,508 4.6% $1,545 $1,963

546 United Church of Christ $3,491 3.6% $3,491

547 IBEW International $3,488 4.8% $3,394 $94

548 Cardinal Health $3,485 2.9% $3,485

549 Lincoln National $3,442 6.5% $1,091 $2,351

550 Producer-Writers Guild $3,439 3.8% $3,439

551 Montgomery Public Schools $3,433 4.2% $1,832 $1,601

552 BMO Financial $3,430 3.9% $1,276 $2,154

553 Parsons $3,405 7.8% $3,405

554 TJX $3,379 1.6% $1,319 $2,060

555 Enterprise Rent-A-Car $3,378 3.6% $3,378

556 Ricoh USA $3,359 -1.6% $1,035 $2,324

557 Farmers Group $3,337 3.6% $3,337

558 Allergan $3,329 0.5% $735 $2,594

559 FIS $3,316 2.2% $3,316

560 Iron Workers, California $3,316 4.4% $2,341 $975

561 Unum Group $3,308 0.5% $1,615 $1,693

562 San Antonio Fire & Police $3,297 -0.8% $3,297

563 Idaho National Laboratory $3,292 2.5% $2,024 $1,268

564 Applied Materials $3,291 5.3% $3,291

565 Hanford Site $3,285 4.7% $1,562 $1,723

566 Beaumont Hospitals $3,279 5.9% $1,311 $1,968

567 Laborers, Massachusetts $3,255 6.6% $1,699 $1,556

568 Salt River Valley $3,236 0.2% $2,286 $950

569 Citizens Financial $3,226 4.8% $1,168 $2,058

570 Oncor Electric Delivery $3,221 -5.4% $2,382 $839

571 Olin $3,210 -2.3% $2,332 $878

572 Laborers, Northern California $3,205 4.7% $2,726 $479

573 Tenneco $3,205 209.1% $1,258 $1,947

574 Santa Barbara County $3,197 3.0% $3,197

575 KBR $3,194 3.7% $93 $3,101

576 Navistar $3,190 -1.6% $2,043 $1,147

577 Omnicom Group $3,190 0.8% $3,190

578 Fresno City Retirement $3,177 3.8% $2,988 $189

579 Gannett $3,177 -3.6% $1,768 $1,409

580 Carpenters, Empire State $3,176 4.9% $3,176

581 Auto Club of Southern Calif. $3,165 3.6% $2,106 $1,059

582 Allina Health $3,161 5.5% $45 $3,116

583 Allegheny Technologies $3,147 -3.5% $1,934 $1,213

584 Harley-Davidson $3,145 -4.1% $2,087 $1,058

585 Publicis USA $3,141 3.1% $214 $2,927

586 HDR $3,123 14.5% $3,123

587 H-E-B $3,121 9.0% $3,121

588 Hartford HealthCare $3,112 4.6% $1,756 $1,356

589 Fiserv $3,111 1.8% $6 $3,105

590 Nevada Higher Education $3,109 $3,109

591 Rite Aid $3,108 -17.4% $3,108

592 ARAMARK $3,106 4.7% $1,525 $1,581

593 Houston Municipal $3,106 8.5% $3,106

594 Newell Brands $3,097 -5.8% $1,223 $1,874

595 AFTRA $3,083 4.9% $3,083

596 San Joaquin County $3,081 4.8% $3,081

597 Manhattan & Bronx Surface $3,072 4.3% $3,072

598 Smithfield Foods $3,072 7.0% $1,971 $1,101

599 CRH Americas $3,048 0.7% $308 $2,740

600 Graham Holdings $3,035 -2.9% $2,353 $682

601 Sentry Insurance $3,034 7.0% $1,592 $1,442

602 Pitney Bowes $3,028 -6.2% $1,472 $1,556

603 Retail Clerks, Wash. $3,001 4.9% $3,001

604 NCR $2,998 -2.1% $1,410 $1,588

605 Seattle City Employees $2,998 3.3% $2,998

606 Hess $2,983 0.6% $2,239 $744


Average asset mixesAs of Sept. 30.

Top 200 DB fundsCorporate funds 2019 2018

Domestic stock 12.5% 15.0%

Int’l stock 8.5% 10.0%

Global equity 9.3% 10.2%

Domestic fixed income 47.4% 43.4%

Global/int’l fixed income 1.7% 1.5%

Cash 2.5% 2.4%

Private equity 6.5% 6.2%

Real estate equity 4.3% 4.7%

Alternative investments 5.4% 4.9%

Other 1.9% 1.7%

Public funds 2019 2018


Int’l stock 17.3% 17.7%




Cash 1.7% 1.6%




Other 1.8% 1.8%

Union funds 2019 2018






Cash 0.6% 0.6%




Other 0.2% 0.0%

Top 1,000 DB fundsCorporate funds 2019 2018






Cash 2.4% 2.3%




Other 1.9% 1.8%

Public funds 2019 2018


Int’l stock 17.4% 17.7%



Global/Int’l fixed income 2.7% 2.2%

Cash 1.6% 1.4%




Other 1.7% 1.9%

Union funds 2019 2018






Cash 0.8% 0.7%




Other 1.1% 0.9%





607 Baltimore Fire & Police $2,977 4.3% $2,977

608 Oklahoma Firefighters $2,975 9.4% $2,975

609 Baltimore County $2,967 4.3% $2,967

610 Operating Eng. Local 18 $2,965 4.9% $2,965

611 University of Wisconsin $2,963 3.6% $2,963

612 Detroit Police & Fire $2,943 -1.0% $2,943

613 Williams $2,940 -0.3% $1,471 $1,469

614 Banner Health $2,936 -4.3% $80 $2,856

615 Hawaii Deferred Comp. $2,936 4.1% $2,936

616 University of Miami $2,935 7.2% $2,935

617 Savings Banks Employees $2,931 5.1% $1,870 $1,061

618 T-Mobile $2,927 9.4% $2,927

619 Unilever USA $2,917 -4.5% $1,037 $1,880

620 W.W. Grainger $2,917 1.8% $2,917

621 Santa Clara County Def. $2,912 4.1% $2,912

622 Teamsters Local 710 $2,910 -12.2% $2,910

623 Tribune $2,905 -6.8% $1,682 $1,223

624 Laborers International $2,883 4.9% $2,777 $106

625 VF Corp. $2,862 1.8% $1,679 $1,183

626 Arlington County $2,854 4.3% $2,854

627 Carpenters, St. Louis $2,845 4.9% $2,845

628 Sonoma County $2,835 2.2% $2,835

629 Evergy $2,833 100.5% $1,502 $1,331

630 American Family $2,832 -0.6% $1,513 $1,319

631 UBS Investment Bank $2,830 4.0% $467 $2,363

632 McDermott $2,829 219.7% $645 $2,184

633 Advance Publications $2,827 -5.0% $1,452 $1,375

634 Waste Management $2,823 5.7% $117 $2,706

635 Daimler Trucks $2,817 3.9% $1,227 $1,590

636 SAS Institute $2,817 3.6% $2,817

637 T. Rowe Price $2,811 7.5% $2,811

638 Aerospace $2,801 5.6% $2,436 $365

639 New York Times $2,800 -0.7% $1,525 $1,275

640 Memphis City $2,798 4.3% $2,474 $324

641 Tyson Foods $2,797 9.6% $71 $2,726

642 Case New Holland $2,779 -3.3% $1,144 $1,635

643 Freeport-McMoRan $2,772 2.6% $833 $1,939

644 Ryder System $2,770 -1.2% $1,396 $1,374

645 Austin Employees $2,761 3.2% $2,761

646 Estee Lauder $2,758 1.7% $910 $1,848

647 Precision Castparts $2,751 -22.9% $847 $1,904

648 Bloomberg $2,743 8.2% $2,743

649 Thrivent Fin’l for Lutherans $2,722 1.8% $1,100 $1,622

650 RBC Wealth Mgmt. $2,718 2.2% $2,718

651 Quad/Graphics $2,714 -4.0% $441 $2,273

652 Amica Mutual Insurance $2,713 2.6% $2,053 $660

653 Land O’Lakes $2,709 2.1% $1,066 $1,643

654 Georgetown University $2,699 2.7% $202 $2,497

655 US Foods $2,693 0.5% $929 $1,764

656 Tesoro $2,680 26.4% $615 $2,065

657 Hershey $2,677 -1.8% $1,015 $1,662

658 JetBlue Airways $2,659 13.1% $2,659

659 Henkel $2,649 4.1% $828 $1,821

660 Barclays Bank $2,648 -2.1% $631 $2,017

661 Pennsylvania Municipal $2,647 2.0% $2,647

662 NXP Semiconductors $2,634 2.8% $2,634

663 PacifiCorp $2,628 -4.8% $1,104 $1,524

664 Sidley Austin $2,626 4.9% $1,031 $1,595

665 Service Employees Int’l $2,625 4.9% $2,625

666 Iowa Fire & Police $2,621 0.5% $2,621

667 Fresenius Medical Care $2,619 3.6% $2,619

668 Interpublic Group $2,612 3.1% $101 $2,511

669 Oklahoma Police $2,598 -0.2% $2,598

670 Avaya $2,597 -39.1% $919 $1,678

671 Johns Hopkins $2,596 4.9% $1,490 $1,106

672 Marin County Employees $2,595 1.5% $2,595

673 Georgia Municipal $2,582 4.3% $2,582

674 Puerto Rico Teachers $2,580 4.3% $2,580


675 Princeton University $2,566 6.3% $2,566

676 Blue Cross/Shield of Mich. $2,560 -2.1% $1,460 $1,100

677 MPERS $2,559 10.6% $2,559

678 UnityPoint Health $2,559 4.1% $487 $2,072

679 Operating Eng. 302 & 612 $2,557 0.7% $2,557

680 Chicago Policemen $2,554 -9.5% $2,554

681 Prince George’s County $2,551 4.3% $2,110 $441

682 Equity League $2,541 5.3% $2,198 $343

683 Fifth Third $2,528 $183 $2,345

684 Hawaiian Electric Industries $2,525 15.3% $1,909 $616

685 Carpenters, Philadelphia $2,520 4.7% $2,296 $224

686 Los Angeles County MTA $2,517 7.6% $1,606 $911

687 NYC Hotel Trades $2,514 4.6% $1,952 $562

688 Solvay USA $2,508 -22.0% $616 $1,892

689 Roofers United $2,498 4.9% $2,462 $36

690 Energy Transfer $2,497 13.8% $758 $1,739

691 Tallahassee City $2,495 4.2% $1,809 $686

692 Cincinnati Children’s $2,493 80.0% $1,418 $1,075

693 BlackRock $2,491 7.2% $2,491

694 BMW USA $2,488 $1,165 $1,323

695 Pipe Trades, Twin Cities $2,488 -0.3% $1,365 $1,123

696 Building Trades United $2,483 4.9% $2,483

697 Fairfax County Education $2,475 -10.3% $2,475

698 Pearson $2,471 -0.2% $126 $2,345

699 Intercontinental Exchange $2,470 1.4% $882 $1,588

700 Jacksonville Retirement $2,464 2.1% $2,206 $258

701 Westinghouse Electric $2,448 -5.3% $1,112 $1,336

702 Teamsters Trucking, N.E. $2,437 -6.5% $2,437

703 Wellington Mgmt. $2,436 3.6% $162 $2,274

704 IBEW 11, 440, 441, 477 $2,433 4.3% $1,470 $963

705 Cerner $2,413 0.5% $2,413


707 George Washington Univ. $2,398 3.2% $2,398

708 Andersen $2,394 2.7% $890 $1,504

709 Verisk Analytics $2,392 -6.0% $620 $1,772

710 Volvo Group $2,390 -4.7% $1,257 $1,133

711 Freddie Mac $2,385 4.7% $56 $2,329

712 Anne Arundel County $2,380 4.2% $2,101 $279

713 Cincinnati City $2,363 -2.7% $2,363

714 New Jersey Transit $2,361 4.3% $2,361

715 Bimbo Bakeries USA $2,357 4.8% $1,211 $1,146

716 Dun & Bradstreet $2,346 -0.8% $1,252 $1,094

717 Denver Employees $2,345 -1.8% $2,345

718 Brunswick $2,341 1.8% $716 $1,625

719 Jones Day $2,340 4.7% $772 $1,568

720 United Steelworkers Int’l $2,339 4.2% $1,982 $357

721 Christiana Care Health $2,338 6.6% $1,023 $1,315

722 CITGO Petroleum $2,337 4.2% $1,187 $1,150

723 Sonoco Products $2,329 3.6% $1,174 $1,155

724 NewPage $2,314 12.4% $1,310 $1,004

725 Fort Worth Employees $2,309 0.5% $2,309

726 Micron Technology $2,308 6.3% $2,308

727 Ark. Local Police & Fire $2,306 5.3% $2,306

728 Kohler $2,301 -2.4% $1,299 $1,002

729 East Bay Municipal Utility $2,295 5.5% $1,822 $473

730 L’Oreal USA $2,287 1.5% $952 $1,335

731 Assurant $2,282 -6.6% $852 $1,430

732 Clorox $2,280 4.5% $487 $1,793

733 Laborers, Southern California $2,279 4.9% $2,279

734 Rolls-Royce, NA $2,277 1.4% $790 $1,487

735 Visa $2,276 8.9% $2,276

736 Stanislaus County $2,272 4.3% $2,272

737 UMass Memorial Health Care $2,272 11.5% $937 $1,335

738 Tampa Fire & Police $2,251 4.3% $2,251

739 General Re $2,236 6.9% $543 $1,693

740 Louisiana Deferred Comp. $2,234 4.1% $2,234

741 Depository Trust & Clearing $2,229 3.4% $982 $1,247

742 Discover $2,224 4.2% $505 $1,719

Average asset mixesAs of Sept. 30.

Top 200 DC plansCorporate plans 2019 2018

Sponsoring co. stock 10.2% 12.7%

Other domestic stock 32.0% 34.6%


Fixed income 6.1% 5.0%

Stable value 10.5% 10.1%

Cash 1.8% 1.8%

Target date 25.3% 19.9%

Inflation protection 0.6% 0.5%

Annuities 0.3% 0.3%

Other 6.9% 8.3%

Public plans 2019 2018





Cash 1.6% 2.4%



Annuities 0.6% 0.1%

Other 6.7% 5.8%

Union plans 2019 2018





Cash 0.0% 0.0%



Annuities 0.0% 0.0%

Other 0.1% 0.0%

Top 1,000 DC plansCorporate plans 2019 2018

Sponsoring co. stock 9.6% 11.6%

Other domestic stock 33.1% 35.7%




Cash 1.9% 1.8%



Annuities 0.3% 0.2%

Other 6.1% 7.2%

Public plans 2019 2018





Cash 1.5% 2.3%



Annuities 0.5% 0.1%

Other 6.4% 5.6%

Union plans 2019 2018





Cash 0.1% 0.3%



Annuities 1.7% 0.0%

Other 1.7% 2.7%




743 USG $2,221 -1.8% $1,326 $895

744 Laborers, Minnesota $2,212 3.6% $2,212

745 Black & Veatch $2,200 5.8% $2,200

746 Lubrizol $2,199 -1.5% $845 $1,354

747 Starbucks $2,198 11.7% $2,198

748 Fox $2,192 -40.7% $792 $1,400

749 IBEW Local 103 $2,183 3.7% $1,198 $985

750 Laborers, Ohio $2,182 2.7% $2,182

751 Laboratory Corp. of America $2,181 3.6% $274 $1,907

752 Talen Energy $2,180 8.6% $1,749 $431

753 Graphic Packaging $2,179 3.1% $1,065 $1,114

754 LyondellBasell $2,178 -32.6% $387 $1,791

755 Carpenters, Western Wash. $2,177 4.5% $1,658 $519

756 Hy-Vee $2,174 3.6% $2,174

757 Teamsters, Central Pa. $2,164 -5.5% $1,064 $1,100

758 Syngenta $2,162 -1.3% $703 $1,459

759 Carpenters, Illinois $2,158 1.0% $2,076 $82

760 Louisiana Municipal Police $2,155 -1.2% $2,155

761 Mastercard $2,147 5.8% $339 $1,808

762 Ameriprise Financial $2,143 -0.4% $2,143

763 Owens Corning $2,143 2.0% $835 $1,308

764 CBRE $2,140 12.6% $2,140

765 Colorado County $2,136 4.1% $2,136

766 Christian Brothers $2,134 2.7% $1,513 $621

767 San Jose Federated City $2,129 -9.1% $2,129

768 Detroit General Retirement $2,128 4.3% $2,128

769 Puerto Rico Electric Power $2,126 4.3% $2,126

770 McClatchy $2,116 -7.6% $1,400 $716

771 Syracuse University $2,103 5.1% $2,103

772 Enbridge $2,099 42.3% $941 $1,158

773 Stanley Black & Decker $2,094 -36.5% $134 $1,960

774 Alaska Electrical $2,089 -0.7% $1,916 $173

775 Jacksonville Police & Fire $2,085 6.1% $2,078 $7

776 Carnegie Mellon University $2,075 4.3% $2,075

777 CHS $2,071 4.6% $867 $1,204

778 Mutual of Omaha $2,069 -2.9% $1,100 $969

779 Laborers Local 731 $2,068 4.5% $1,543 $525

780 Facebook $2,062 $2,062

781 Huntington Bancshares $2,060 7.7% $931 $1,129

782 Operating Eng. Local 825 $2,059 4.0% $872 $1,187

783 Cultural Institutions $2,055 5.2% $1,449 $606

784 Dallas Police & Fire $2,051 -5.7% $2,051

785 Best Buy $2,045 6.1% $2,045

786 Sappi Fine Paper $2,045 7.2% $1,144 $901

787 Fidelity National $2,043 5.4% $2,043

788 FMC $2,040 $1,412 $628

789 McMaster-Carr Supply $2,035 2.1% $2,035

790 Nielsen $2,029 4.0% $299 $1,730

791 Graybar Electric $2,017 4.1% $664 $1,353

792 Hilton Hotels $2,017 -7.1% $341 $1,676

793 Adobe Systems $2,015 9.7% $2,015

794 Lehigh Hanson $2,007 -8.4% $1,181 $826

795 Aerojet Rocketdyne $2,006 5.6% $1,041 $965

796 TechnipFMC USA $1,996 4.3% $624 $1,372

797 Swagelok $1,995 13.6% $1,995

798 Lifetouch $1,992 3.6% $1,992

799 University of Oregon $1,978 3.6% $1,978

800 Aptiv $1,974 -1.2% $1,974

801 Latham & Watkins $1,973 5.2% $224 $1,749

802 Masco $1,966 3.4% $488 $1,478

803 Vulcan Materials $1,964 3.7% $930 $1,034

804 MidAmerican Energy $1,957 -0.8% $715 $1,242

805 Windstream $1,945 -4.8% $826 $1,119

806 Sodexo $1,944 3.3% $1,944

807 Seagate Technology $1,941 -0.2% $1,941

808 Office Depot $1,940 -2.7% $867 $1,073

809 Viacom $1,927 -0.4% $527 $1,400

810 Jones Lang LaSalle $1,923 8.5% $1,923


811 Seafarers $1,921 2.7% $1,736 $185

812 Transocean $1,921 -3.3% $1,288 $633

813 Teva USA $1,913 $1,913

814 Iowa Administrative Services $1,911 4.1% $1,911

815 National Oilwell Varco $1,911 -1.0% $303 $1,608

816 Armstrong World Industries $1,907 -2.7% $1,511 $396

817 Allianz of America $1,906 6.8% $597 $1,309

818 Dover $1,904 -10.4% $543 $1,361

819 S.C. Johnson & Son $1,903 0.8% $626 $1,277

820 University of Maine $1,899 3.7% $36 $1,863

821 Industrial Workers Timber $1,897 4.6% $1,569 $328

822 Ametek $1,893 -0.2% $609 $1,284

823 Chicago Transit Authority $1,872 2.7% $1,872

824 Trader Joe’s $1,872 $1,872

825 University of Notre Dame $1,872 5.5% $1,872

826 Dartmouth College $1,870 3.2% $135 $1,735

827 UFCW International, D.C. $1,868 4.8% $1,787 $81

828 MGM Resorts Int’l $1,867 20.8% $1,867

829 TOTAL $1,864 5.0% $1,168 $696

830 Devon Energy $1,861 0.2% $1,093 $768

831 Fulton County $1,861 4.2% $1,263 $598

832 Keysight Technologies $1,855 10.5% $1,855

833 Louisiana Schools $1,853 -5.9% $1,853

834 Snap-on $1,851 1.9% $1,208 $643

835 SEPTA $1,849 4.3% $1,849

836 Avery Dennison $1,843 1.2% $794 $1,049

837 SS&C Technologies $1,838 24.2% $1,838

838 Owens-Illinois $1,835 -11.0% $1,216 $619

839 Akzo Nobel $1,830 4.0% $338 $1,492

840 Dana $1,828 -20.6% $1,217 $611

841 Baltimore City $1,827 0.4% $1,827

842 Newmont Mining $1,822 3.8% $1,076 $746

843 Old Republican Int’l $1,821 4.4% $477 $1,344

844 First Data $1,817 -3.1% $215 $1,602

845 Tacoma Employees $1,813 3.7% $1,813

846 Nassau County Def. Comp. $1,803 4.1% $1,803

847 Skadden, Arps, Slate $1,802 3.7% $65 $1,737

848 GROWMARK $1,801 2.9% $1,347 $454

849 Brown University $1,793 5.0% $1,793

850 Teamsters, Philadelphia $1,790 -2.7% $1,790

851 Steelcase $1,776 5.7% $1,776

852 American Fed. of Musicians $1,774 -3.8% $1,774

853 UFCW Midwest $1,774 4.9% $1,774

854 Gap $1,762 3.9% $1,762

855 Blue Cross/Shield of Mass. $1,760 2.3% $1,005 $755

856 Intuit $1,754 4.1% $1,754

857 MBTA Retirement $1,751 4.3% $1,751

858 Louisiana Firefighters $1,749 3.0% $1,749

859 NV Energy $1,746 -1.9% $926 $820

860 ONE Gas $1,746 2.2% $905 $841

861 Rio Tinto America $1,736 -7.9% $978 $758

862 Carpenters, Twin Cities $1,732 -0.8% $1,732

863 CPS Energy $1,719 1.7% $1,719

864 Penske Truck Leasing $1,718 6.3% $496 $1,222

865 YRC Worldwide $1,717 -3.8% $969 $748

866 St. Jude Medical $1,714 3.6% $1,714

867 National Railroad Passenger $1,713 0.2% $434 $1,279

868 Osram Sylvania $1,713 4.6% $1,226 $487

869 Cook County Def. Comp. $1,712 4.1% $1,712

870 Woodward $1,712 3.8% $164 $1,548

871 National Football League $1,707 3.5% $1,707

872 Food & Comm. Local 27 $1,701 4.9% $1,693 $8

873 Northeastern University $1,700 4.2% $1,700

874 Miami Fire & Police $1,699 9.1% $1,699

875 Bemis $1,698 -13.8% $629 $1,069

876 Levi Strauss $1,698 7.5% $948 $750

877 TECO Energy $1,695 -2.3% $754 $941


Other

Alternative investments

Real estate equity

Private equity

Cash

Global/international fixed income

Domestic fixed income

Global equity

International stock

Top 1,000 DB GVOEsDomestic stock

20192018

20192018

24.8%

16.4%

6.1%

24.1%

8.5%

7.5%

7.1%

22.6%

15.6%

6.6%

24.8%

9.1%

7.9%

7.0%

1.7%

2.1%

1.6%

1.8%

2.9%

1.8%

24.9%

16.4%

6.2%

23.9%

8.7%

7.7%

6.9%

22.5%

15.5%

6.8%

24.5%

9.3%

8.1%

6.9%

Other

Alternative investments

Real estate equity

Private equity

Cash

Global/int'l fixed income

Domestic fixed income

Global equity

International stock

Aggregate asset mixesAs of Sept. 30.

Top 200 DB GVOETDomestic stock

2.8%2.0%

1.9%1.6%

1.7%1.7%





878 LafargeHolcim US $1,693 10.9% $755 $938

879 Peabody $1,693 -5.5% $706 $987

880 Shelby County $1,691 4.3% $1,691

881 First American $1,686 2.4% $1,686

882 Kohl’s $1,686 9.4% $1,686

883 Puget Sound Energy $1,682 1.9% $738 $944

884 Milwaukee County $1,680 -3.2% $1,680

885 Hanesbrands $1,668 -0.1% $897 $771

886 IBEW Local 68, District 8 $1,666 4.5% $1,130 $536

887 Teamsters, N.Y. State Conf. $1,666 4.9% $1,666

888 Suffolk County Def. Comp. $1,665 $1,665

889 San Diego County Def. Comp. $1,661 $1,661

890 Bank of the West $1,658 -3.5% $442 $1,216

891 SKF USA $1,658 10.3% $923 $735

892 Carpenter Technology $1,656 -3.6% $975 $681

893 Bricklayers International $1,641 0.3% $1,463 $178

894 Cooper Tire & Rubber $1,641 1.7% $1,047 $594

895 Limited Brands $1,641 3.7% $1,641

896 Fortune Brands Hm. & Sec. $1,640 7.5% $675 $965

897 Evonik North America $1,636 0.6% $534 $1,102

898 Wolters Kluwer $1,627 4.2% $150 $1,477

899 Tulare County $1,623 -2.7% $1,623

900 Panasonic USA $1,621 4.2% $406 $1,215

901 San Luis Obispo County $1,618 2.1% $1,428 $190

902 Caesars Entertainment $1,616 1.5% $1,616

903 Boy Scouts of America $1,613 2.0% $1,502 $111

904 Reform Pension $1,608 5.9% $1,608

905 Hartford Municipal $1,603 4.3% $1,603

906 Yum Brands $1,601 -2.0% $838 $763

907 Marine Engineers $1,600 4.5% $1,126 $474

908 AFSCME $1,599 0.7% $1,415 $184

909 BHP-Billiton $1,596 2.8% $462 $1,134

910 Twin City Hospital, Nurses $1,596 8.5% $1,596

911 Iron Workers 40, 361, 417 $1,590 4.7% $560 $1,030

912 Operating Eng. Local 324 $1,589 4.7% $1,431 $158

913 Deluxe $1,584 -3.4% $1,584


915 Essentia Health $1,580 4.4% $1,580

916 Timken $1,580 -7.3% $434 $1,146

917 Republic Services $1,573 3.6% $1,573

918 W.R. Grace $1,570 2.3% $968 $602

919 Stationary Engineers 39 $1,569 4.3% $1,352 $217

920 Lexmark International $1,567 -5.5% $498 $1,069

921 Fujitsu America $1,556 -1.6% $1,556

922 Saint Louis University $1,543 3.8% $1,543

923 Memphis Light Gas & Water $1,540 -17.2% $1,540

924 Arkansas State Highway $1,535 4.3% $1,535

925 Keurig Dr Pepper $1,533 26.6% $189 $1,344

926 TimkenSteel $1,528 -4.5% $1,080 $448

927 Sealed Air $1,526 -6.0% $135 $1,391

928 El Paso Fire & Police $1,525 1.7% $1,525

929 Franklin Resources $1,522 1.9% $1,522

930 Milliken $1,522 -0.5% $311 $1,211

931 Flowserve $1,520 $495 $1,025

932 Crane $1,519 13.9% $464 $1,055

933 Bertelsmann $1,518 3.7% $187 $1,331

934 Carpenters, N. Central States $1,515 4.3% $1,400 $115

935 Wayne County $1,513 4.3% $1,037 $476

936 Hubbell $1,509 1.1% $624 $885

937 CFI $1,507 4.9% $844 $663

938 Portland General Electric $1,507 -1.8% $607 $900

939 Navy Exchange $1,505 -19.2% $1,505

940 Telephone & Data Systems $1,501 6.2% $1,501

941 Underwriters Laboratories $1,501 11.8% $291 $1,210

942 Meritor $1,499 4.7% $919 $580

943 Analog Devices $1,497 3.5% $1,497

944 Alliant Energy $1,494 -1.5% $306 $1,188

945 Southern Electrical Retire. $1,493 9.1% $1,493


946 Crown Holdings $1,491 -7.8% $1,125 $366

947 Laborers National $1,487 -3.1% $1,487

948 Agilent Technologies $1,481 5.9% $1,481

949 Bombardier Motor $1,478 40.9% $660 $818

950 Arizona Deferred Comp. $1,473 $1,473

951 First Horizon National $1,472 -5.8% $847 $625

952 Equifax $1,471 2.5% $558 $913

953 Independence Blue Cross $1,469 -2.2% $799 $670

954 National Fuel Gas $1,467 0.8% $1,043 $424

955 IBEW Local 26 $1,464 5.4% $694 $770

956 Hanover Insurance $1,460 1.3% $511 $949

957 Birmingham City $1,455 4.3% $1,455

958 Middlesex County $1,455 2.8% $1,455

959 BorgWarner $1,453 -1.1% $236 $1,217

960 California State University $1,451 $1,451

961 IBEW Local 58 $1,443 4.3% $827 $616

962 Pension Plan for Insurance $1,436 5.9% $1,436

963 SRI International $1,434 0.8% $1,434

964 Sabre Holdings $1,433 -4.7% $347 $1,086

965 CONSOL Energy $1,421 -8.1% $642 $779

966 Carpenters, Greater Pa. $1,420 -4.4% $979 $441

967 Howard Hughes Medical $1,418 2.9% $1,418

968 AAA N. Calif., Nev. & Utah $1,414 -3.2% $992 $422

969 Electrolux $1,414 -1.0% $957 $457

970 Brown-Forman $1,412 -2.9% $800 $612

971 DeKalb County Employees $1,409 -3.7% $1,409

972 DLA Piper $1,405 3.0% $221 $1,184

973 Automotive Industries $1,404 4.9% $1,357 $47

974 Huntsman $1,402 -3.0% $621 $781

975 Michigan Catholic Conference $1,400 $1,333 $67

976 ThyssenKrupp $1,399 0.4% $356 $1,043

977 Albemarle $1,398 -8.1% $570 $828

978 Chicago MWRD Retirement $1,393 -3.1% $1,393

979 Darden Restaurants $1,387 21.2% $278 $1,109

980 Mattel $1,384 -5.1% $343 $1,041

981 Western & Southern Life $1,382 3.2% $1,037 $345

982 Dean Foods $1,378 -3.6% $332 $1,046

983 IBEW Local 1 $1,374 3.5% $1,374

984 Smiths Group $1,374 -2.3% $344 $1,030

985 Alticor $1,372 2.0% $1,372

986 MARTA $1,369 4.3% $1,369

987 Mosaic $1,368 -4.6% $380 $988

988 Staples $1,368 -18.1% $1,368

989 Cambridge Retirement $1,366 4.3% $1,366

990 Engility $1,365 4.0% $52 $1,313

991 OGE Energy $1,365 -2.8% $602 $763

992 Weil, Gotshal & Manges $1,362 5.1% $558 $804

993 Questar $1,361 5.0% $892 $469

994 Kennametal $1,359 -2.0% $698 $661

995 Teamsters Local 639 $1,359 3.1% $1,359

996 Conduent $1,354 3.8% $67 $1,287

997 Duquesne Light $1,353 -0.6% $1,105 $248

998 Wichita Retirement $1,347 -2.6% $1,347

999 Operating Eng. 94, 94a & 94b $1,346 5.0% $1,346

1,000 TRW Automotive Holdings $1,346 -2.0% $346 $1,000

201-1,000 total $3,148,404

1-1,000 total $11,321,130

20192018

20192018

Other

Annuities

Inflation protection

Target date

Cash

Stable value

Fixed income

International stock

Aggregate asset mixesAs of Sept. 30.

Top 200 DC QMBOs

Domestic stock

43.0%

14.0%

21.3%

39.6%

14.8%

23.5%

43.1%

12.8%

21.6%

39.9%

13.5%

23.7%

Other

Annuities

Inflation protection

Target date

Cash

Stable value

Fixed income

International stock

Top 1,000 DC QMBOsDomestic stock

5.4%6.1%

5.4%4.7%

6.9%6.4%

0.3%0.3%

0.2%0.1%

3.9%4.1%

5.6%6.4%

5.7%4.9%

7.2%6.7%

0.3%0.3%

0.2%0.1%

3.9%4.1%

stay private longer for the last sev-eral years, private markets are get-ting larger, Mr. Voss said.

Among the defi ned benefi t plans of the 200 largest U.S. plan spon-sors, infrastructure assets increased by 18.1% to $33.9 billion during the year and 164.8% over the fi ve years, while real estate rose by 6.1% to $355 billion and by 23.8% for the fi ve years ended Sept. 30. The year-over-year growth of infrastructurewas slower than last year’s surveyresults, when assets were up by24.2%, while real estate assets haveincreased at a steady 6% rate for the last three survey periods.

Real estate asset growth refl ected in this year’s survey are in line with returns. The NC-REIF Property index was up 6.24% during the 12 months ended Sept. 30.

The top three real estate investors on this year’s list are the $384.4 billion California Pub-lic Employees Retire-ment Association, Sac-ramento, with assets up 6.3% to $37.1 bil-lion; $243.3 billion California State Teachers’ Retirement System, West Sacramento, with a 13.61% increase to $34 billion; and $157.6 billion Texas Teacher Retirement System, Austin, up 18.15% to $21.7 billion.

Uneven resultsThe results for the private credit

and debt asset classes tracked by Pensions & Investments’ annual survey were uneven, all from small bases. Private credit exhibited the largest one-year increase, which rose 61.5% to $26 billion. Bank loans rose by 24.8% to $13.1 billion. P&I does not have fi ve years of data for private credit and bank loans. Meanwhile, mezzanine debt was up

10% for the year at $3.3 billion but down 45% for the fi ve years. Dis-tressed debt was down for both pe-riods, by 6% for the year and 24.3% for the fi ve years, to $18.7 billion.

“Private credit has been a ben-efi ciary of sustained quantitative easing and its popularity comes at the expense of traditional fi xed in-come,” said David Fann, New York-based president and CEO of private equity consulting fi rm TorreyCove Capital Partners LLC. “Private cred-it usually generates higher returns than most traditional fi xed-income products, and recent default and loss ratios have been minimal.”

The two largest private credit investors in private credit had very different experiences in the year. Top ranked $41 billion Arizona State Retirement witnessed as-

set growth of 68.2% to $8.1 billion, while the private credit assets of second place $94.2 billion North Carolina Retirement Systems, Raleigh, dipped by 1.6% to $5.7 billion.

At the same time, private credit lend-ers in some cases have supplanted the need for mezzanine debt providers. And with the exception of en-ergy and specialty re-

tail industry sectors, the supply of distressed debt has declined in this environment, Mr. Fann explained.

While hedge fund returns were very slightly positive, overall hedge fund assets, direct hedge funds and hedge fund-of-funds assets all dropped in the year. Hedge fund assets overall fell 3.2% to $154.9 billion, direct hedge funds dipped 2.4% to $134.5 billion and hedge fund of funds dropped 8.1% to $20.4 billion in the 12 months ended Sept. 30. Only direct hedge funds grewover the fi ve-year period, up 3.9%,compared to a 28.9% drop in hedgefund of funds and a 2.1% dip forhedge funds overall.

In the 12 months ended Sept.

30, 2019, the HFRI (Hedge) Fund Weighted Composite index was up 0.37%.

Meanwhile, private equity, buy-out and venture capital each saw growth over both time periods. Private equity rose 9% in the year and 18.6% over the fi ve-year period to $400 billion. Buyouts were up 5.1% in the year and 11.5% in the fi ve years to $219.3 billion. Venturecapital increased 4.9% in the oneyear and 22.5% over the fi ve yearsto $43 billion.

Mostly double digitsAssets of the largest 13 venture

capital investors on this year’s list all saw their assets increase over the year, all by double digits but one.

The three pension plans with the largest venture capital portfolios were the Washington State Invest-ment Board, with assets up 25.6% to $4.4 billion; Texas Teachers, with its portfolio increasing 14.6% to $4.3 billion; and the $162.5 billion plan of the Florida State Board of Ad-ministration, Tallahassee, up 13.8% to $2.8 billion.

The Cambridge Associates LLC U.S. Venture Capital index was up 14.81% for the one year and 13.28% for the fi ve years ended Sept. 30. Cambridge’s U.S. Private Equity in-dex earned 7.74% for the year and 11.51% for the fi ve years ended Sept. 30.

“Over the past fi ve years, we were in a virtuous cycle for ven-ture capital,” Mr. Fann said. “The rise of ‘unicorn’ companies (ven-ture capital-backed companies with valuations over $1 billion) caused many VC funds to signifi -cantly appreciate.”

With good asset class perfor-mance, investors increased their investments, in effect, chasing per-formance, he said.

Some venture capital funds raised sizable late-stage growth-oriented funds, especially as many private companies delayed going public, Mr. Fann said.

The growing number of private companies staying private longer also helps to explain the increased venture capital exposure, Mr. Fann added.

U.S. venture capital fundrais-

ing in 2019 was the second-highest since 2006, according to the most recent quarterly report by the Na-tional Venture Capital Association and PitchBook Data Inc.

Some 259 U.S. venture capital funds raised a total of $46.3 billion in 2019. Last year was just under the record venture capital fund-raising year of 2018, according to the report.

Over the last fi ve years, several managers have raised very large venture capital funds. By far the biggest is the $19.6 billion China State-Owned Capital Venture In-vestment Fund managed by China Reform Holdings Corp. Ltd., a Bei-jing-based state-owned enterprise that closed in 2016.

Behind that fund are a number of managers that raised $3 billion-plus funds. Tiger Global Manage-ment raised two venture capital funds of $3.75 billion each, Tiger Global Private Investment Partners XI and Tiger Global Private Invest-ment Partners XII, in 2018 and 2019, respectively.

The fi rm raised the capital just three years after it raised $2.5 bil-lion for Tiger Global Private Invest-ment Partners X in 2015, according to information from Preqin and Bloomberg reports.

New Enterprise Associates is also in the $3 billion club, raising $3.3 billion for New Enterprise Associates 16 in 2017, two years after closing on $2.8 billion New Enterprise Associates 15, Preqin data show.

The fi rm is currently raising a new fund, New Enterprise As-sociates 17, which has a $4 bil-lion fundraising target, according to documents on the website of a fund investor, the $9.7 billion Sac-ramento County (Calif.) Employees’ Retirement System.

Technology Crossover Part-ners closed on a $3 billion fund in January 2019, Technology Cross-over Ventures X. The fi rm closed the predecessor fund, Technology Crossover Ventures IX, at $2.5 bil-lion in 2016. �



Defined benefitNumberof funds

Domestic active equity 70

Domestic passive equity 72

Domestic enhanced indexed equity 20

International active equity 73

International passive equity 66

International enhanced indexed equity 6

Global active equity 39

Global passive equity 15

Developed markets equity, active 69

Developed markets equity, passive 63

Emerging markets equity, active 63

Emerging markets equity, passive 32

REITs 42

Factor-based equity 13

Domestic active bonds 80

Domestic passive bonds 47

Domestic enhanced indexed bonds 6

Global/international active bonds 48

Global/international passive bonds 8


Developed markets bonds, active 12

Developed markets bonds, passive 3

Emerging markets debt, active 27

Emerging markets debt, passive 4

Cash 86

Inflation-protected securities 31

High yield 54

Bank loans 20

U.S. real estate equity 55

International real estate equity 31

Timber 27

Infrastructure 38

Hedge funds (direct investments) 50

Hedge fund of funds 24

Energy 29

Commodities 21

Private equity 87

Buyouts 57

Venture capital 53

Mezzanine 30

Distressed debt 40


Private credit/debt 18

ETFs 7

Mutual funds 9

Commingled vehicles 33

Separate accounts 38

Defined contributionNumberof funds

Passive indexed equity 62

REITs 28

Passive indexed bonds 50

Inflation-protected securities 39

Commodities 15

Target-date strategies 65

Custom 27

Off-the-shelf 28

CITs 43

ETFs 2

Managed accounts 12

Mutual funds 35

Separate accounts 41

Number of funds among the top 200 using strategy citedAs of Sept. 30.

Pensions & Investments gathered information for this report, published annually since 1974, in three steps.

Questionnaires were sent to more than 1,300 fund sponsors in P&I’s database. The largest 1,000 were iden-tifi ed from completed questionnaires, follow-up phone calls and emails, and database searches.

Data for sponsoring entities that did not respond were culled from published annual or quarterly reports and Form 5500s fi led with the Department of Labor. Morningstar Inc. provided source materials used as refer-ences to gather the most recent historical asset data for certain plans.

P&I’s survey generally covers the 12 months ended Sept. 30, 2019. In cases where no information was avail-able from the fund, or the data were older than June 30, 2019, P&I calculated estimates to Sept. 30.

New questions that were added this year were asking whether DB or DC plans had an external cybersecurity vendor; whether DC plans contain or apply ESG principles within target-date funds; and whether DC plans’ offer stand-alone retirement income options and if the invest-ment lineup includes options with an ESG focus.

Dollar amounts generally are rounded to the nearest million; in certain tables and charts, they are rounded to billions. The aggregate asset mixes represent the weighted averages of all reported allocations for the respective funds.

All data in this special report are ©2020 Crain Com-munications Inc. Reproduction without permission is prohibited. �

How the data were compiled

AltsCONTINUED FROM PAGE 17

Growth of venture capital in DB funds Among the top 200 funds; assets are in billions as of Sept. 30.

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

$50

$55

201920182017201620152014

Growth ofinfrastructure in DB funds Among the top 200 funds; assets are in billions as of Sept. 30.

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

201920182017201620152014

SHIFTING SANDS: Scott Voss said alternatives are growing at the ex-pense of public markets.



DB assets by investment vehicleAmong the top 200 funds as of Sept. 30. Data in parentheses are previous year.

Separate accounts71.9%(72.9%)

Commingled vehicles27.6%(26.5%)

Mutual funds0.4%(0.4%)

ETFs0.1%(0.2%)

Funds with the most DB assets managed internallyAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Rank FundTotal

assetsDomestic

equityInt’l

equityGlobalequity

Domesticfixed

income

Global/int’l fixed

incomeAlternative investments

1 California Public Employees $286,390 $96,967 $84,533 $85,363 $18,785 $742

2 California State Teachers $114,678 $52,432 $20,383 $36,690 $516

3 New York State Common $110,927 $65,048 $127 $45,752

4 Georgia Teachers $78,782 $40,675 $12,440 $955 $24,116

5 New York State Teachers $71,251 $39,626 $56 $18,595

6 Florida State Board $65,772 $36,170 $1,175 $18,718 $9,709

7 New Jersey $58,666 $22,833 $13,974 $14,489

8 Wisconsin Investment Board $57,145 $39,237 $11,610 $2,792

9 United Nations Joint Staff $57,062

10 Texas Teachers $55,519 $8,704 $19,572 $18,573

11 Ohio State Teachers $53,228 $18,687 $9,920 $593 $14,356 $8,460

12 North Carolina $52,335 $11,056 $27,818 $13,461

13 Ohio Public Employees $43,857 $18,230 $3,900 $18,000 $3,727

14 Alabama Retirement $38,029 $20,868 $5,023 $5,207 $3,673

15 Tennessee Consolidated $34,824 $17,086 $3,251

16 Colorado Employees $31,277 $11,901 $4,954 $3,675 $10,720 $27

17 Virginia Retirement $26,781 $8,526 $5,366 $12,889

18 Pennsylvania School Empl. $26,047 $2,688 $2,019 $12,045 $8,441

19 Washington State Board $20,729 $20,729

20 Michigan Retirement $19,926 $12,012 $2,653 $5,261

Fund Assets

Texas County & District $32,112

Northrop Grumman $30,462

Texas Municipal Retirement $29,984

J.P. Morgan Chase $16,225

California State Teachers $14,207

Citigroup $12,886

Merck $10,884

Wells Fargo $10,500

MetLife $8,622

Ernst & Young $8,239

Deloitte $6,689

Prudential Financial $5,621

PNC $5,554

Exelon $2,259

Funds among the top 200 with DB assets in hybrid plansAssets are in millions as ofSept. 30.

Funds with the most DB assets in equities Among the top 200 funds; assets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Domestic equityRank Fund Assets

1 California Public Employees $99,597






7 Georgia Teachers $40,675



10 New Jersey $22,833

International equityRank Fund Assets










10 Ohio State Teachers $17,460

Developed markets equityRank Fund Assets


2 Wisconsin Investment Board $54,730








10 Virginia Retirement $14,565

Emerging markets equityRank Fund Assets







7 Maryland State Retirement $5,454

8 New Jersey $4,941

9 Massachusetts PRIM $4,492


Funds with the most DB assets in fixed income Among the top 200 funds; assets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Domestic fixed incomeRank Fund Assets




4 IBM $42,008






10 Georgia Teachers $24,116

International/global fixed incomeRank Fund Assets


2 Iowa Public Employees $10,435

3 Texas Employees $7,879


5 Pennsylvania School Empl. $4,786

6 Indiana Public Retirement $3,919

7 Illinois Teachers $3,736

8 San Francisco City & County $3,505



Developed markets fixed incomeRank Fund Assets





5 Ohio School Employees $2,252

6 Los Angeles Water & Power $2,156

7 Mississippi Employees $1,424


9 New York City Retirement $701

10 Consolidated Edison $651

Emerging markets debtRank Fund Assets






6 South Carolina Public Empl. $1,260



9 Ohio State Teachers $984

10 Kaiser $894

Funds with the most DB assets in REITsAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Funds with the most DB assets in inflation-protected securitiesAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Funds with the most DB assets in bank loansAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Funds with the most DB assets in factor-based strategiesAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Rank Fund Assets








8 Michigan Retirement $1,256


10 Texas Employees $897

Rank Fund Assets











Rank Fund Assets


2 Oregon Public Employees $2,612


4 Los Angeles County Empl. $917

5 Kaiser $793

6 Illinois Municipal $573

7 Maryland State Retirement $493

8 Ohio Police & Fire $447

9 California Public Employees $374

10 Kentucky Teachers $266

Rank Fund Assets





5 Operating Eng. International $2,700

6 Oklahoma Teachers $2,300

7 Alaska Retirement $2,233

8 Illinois State Board $855

9 Prudential Financial $700

10 Missouri Schools & Educ. $503



Global equityRank Fund Assets






6 Operating Eng. International $10,359


8 Arkansas Teachers $9,331

9 United Technologies $8,283


High-yield securitiesRank Fund Assets


2 New Jersey $5,970




6 Kaiser $2,426

7 Texas Employees $2,402

8 New Mexico Educational $2,401

9 Los Angeles County Empl. $2,347


Funds among the top 200 with DB plans using ESG factorsAs of Sept. 30.

Å Alabama Retirement Å California Public Employees Å California State Teachers Å California University Å Colorado Employees Å Connecticut Retirement Å Deloitte Å Florida State Board Å Idaho Public Employees Å Illinois State Board Å Illinois State Universities Å J.P. Morgan Chase Å Kaiser Å Los Angeles City Employees Å Los Angeles County Empl. Å Maryland State Retirement Å Minnesota State Board Å New Jersey Å New York City Retirement Å New York State Common Å Prudential Financial Å Washington State Board Å Wisconsin Investment Board

Funds among the top 200 with DB plans using an external cybersecurity vendorAs of Sept. 30.

Å Alabama Retirement Å Florida State Board Å Illinois State Board Å Illinois Teachers Å New York City Retirement Å Oklahoma Teachers Å Pennsylvania School Employees

Funds with the most DB assets in alternativesAmong the top 200 funds; assets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Total assetsRank Fund Assets





















Real estate equityRank Fund Total











BuyoutsRank Fund Total









9 New Jersey $7,717


InfrastructureRank Fund Total








8 Kaiser $1,236



Private credit/debtRank Fund Total

1 Arizona State Retirement $8,114




5 Exelon $1,261


7 Illinois State Board $633

8 New York State Teachers $578

9 Missouri Schools & Educ. $483

10 Orange County $425

Distressed debtRank Fund Total








8 New Jersey $888

9 Washington State Board $850

10 Pennsylvania School Empl. $696

Venture capitalRank Fund Total










10 Texas County & District $1,553

Private equityRank Fund Total











EnergyRank Fund Total





5 New Jersey $2,065



8 Texas County & District $1,342

9 Ohio Police & Fire $1,245


CommoditiesRank Fund Total







7 Los Angeles Fire & Police $996

8 Florida State Board $380

9 Illinois State Universities $346

10 Citigroup $288

MezzanineRank Fund Total

1 Los Angeles City Employees $504

2 New York State Teachers $454


4 California State Teachers $377

5 Michigan Retirement $295

6 New Mexico Educational $190

7 Texas Municipal Retirement $146

8 Pentegra $143

9 California Public Employees $128

10 Indiana Public Retirement $104

Funds with the most DB assets in hedge fundsAmong the top 200 funds; assets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Rank FundTotal

assetsDirect

investmentsFunds of

funds

1 California State Teachers $13,952 $13,952

2 Michigan Retirement $12,180 $4,125 $8,055

3 Virginia Retirement $10,918 $10,918

4 Texas Teachers $7,688 $7,688

5 Ohio Public Employees $7,182 $7,181 $1

6 Massachusetts PRIM $6,266 $5,554 $712

7 Pennsylvania School Empl. $5,984 $5,984

8 Wisconsin Invest. Board $5,750 $5,750

9 Illinois Teachers $5,543 $5,200 $343

10 Missouri Schools & Educ. $5,285 $5,285

11 Florida State Board $4,941 $3,866 $1,075

12 Texas County & District $4,860 $4,860

13 New York State Common $4,806 $4,806

14 California University $4,319 $4,319

15 Oregon Public Employees $4,253 $4,253

Rank FundTotal

assetsDirect

investmentsFunds of

funds

16 New Jersey $4,162 $3,424 $738

17 Maryland State Retirement $4,053 $4,053

18 Kaiser $3,590 $3,078 $512

19 New York City Retirement $3,569 $3,430 $139

20 United Parcel Service $3,130 $3,130

21 Indiana Public Retirement $2,911 $2,546 $365

22 North Carolina $2,705 $2,705

23 Connecticut Retirement $2,644 $2,644

24 Eli Lilly $2,530 $1,215 $1,315

25 Texas Municipal Retirement $2,294 $2,294

26 Los Angeles County Empl. $2,052 $710 $1,342

27 Citigroup $1,818 $1,818

28 West Virginia Investment $1,753 $1,753

29 Prudential Financial $1,515 $1,256 $259

30 Ohio Police & Fire $1,497 $703 $794



The largest DC funds by type Assets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

401(k) fundsRank Fund Assets

1 Boeing $66,327

2 IBM $53,629

3 Wells Fargo $43,200



6 Northrop Grumman $25,210


8 United Parcel Service $23,133

9 United Continental Holdings $21,290

10 CVS Health $21,044

457 fundsRank Fund Assets



3 Ohio Deferred Comp. $14,499

4 Los Angeles Co. Deferred $12,180





9 Illinois State Board $4,701


401(a) fundsRank Fund Assets



3 National Electric $9,066

4 Alaska Retirement $5,904



7 Tennessee Consolidated $3,816


9 Illinois State Universities $2,617

10 Louisiana Teachers $2,326

403(b) fundsRank Fund Assets



3 Kaiser $8,057


5 Pentegra $341

6 Oklahoma Teachers $157

7 North Carolina $19

Funds with DC plans offering auto enrollmentAmong the top 200 funds as of Sept. 30.

��Å Accenture��Å Alaska Retirement��Å American Airlines��Å Bayer��Å BP America��Å California University��Å Caterpillar��Å CenturyLink��Å Citigroup��Å Consolidated Edison��Å Corteva��Å Costco Wholesale��Å Deere��Å Walt Disney��Å Electrical Industry, Joint Board��Å Ernst & Young

��Å Exelon��Å Federal Retirement Thrift��Å Ford Motor��Å Illinois State Board��Å Indiana Public Retirement��Å Intel��Å IBM��Å Kaiser��Å Eli Lilly��Å Merck��Å MetLife��Å Michigan Municipal��Å Michigan Retirement��Å J.P. Morgan Chase��Å National Electric

��Å Northrop Grumman��Å Ohio Deferred Compensation��Å Pentegra��Å PNC��Å Prudential Financial��Å Southern Co.��Å Southwest Airlines��Å Tennessee Consolidated��Å Texas Employees��Å United Continental Holdings��Å United Technologies��Å Virginia Retirement��Å Wespath UMC

Funds with DC plans offering auto escalationAmong the top 200 funds as of Sept. 30.

��Å American Airlines��Å Bayer��Å California Savings Plus��Å Caterpillar��Å CenturyLink��Å Citigroup��Å Colorado Employees��Å Consolidated Edison��Å Corteva��Å Costco Wholesale��Å Deere��Å Deloitte��Å Walt Disney��Å Ernst & Young��Å Exelon��Å Ford Motor

��Å Honeywell��Å Intel��Å IBM��Å Eli Lilly��Å Merck��Å MetLife��Å Michigan Retirement��Å J.P. Morgan Chase��Å National Electric��Å New Jersey��Å New Mexico Public Employees��Å Northrop Grumman��Å Ohio Deferred Compensation��Å Pentegra��Å Prudential Financial

��Å Target��Å United Continental Holdings��Å United Technologies��Å Virginia Retirement��Å Wespath UMC

Funds with DC plans offering white-label optionsAmong the top 200 funds as of Sept. 30.

��Å Alaska Retirement��Å American Airlines��Å BP America��Å California Savings Plus��Å California University��Å Caterpillar��Å CenturyLink��Å Citigroup��Å Colorado Employees��Å Corteva��Å Costco Wholesale��Å Exelon��Å Florida State Board��Å Honeywell

��Å Indiana Public Retirement��Å Intel��Å IBM��Å Kaiser��Å Eli Lilly��Å Los Angeles County Deferred��Å Merck��Å MetLife��Å National Rural Electric��Å New Jersey��Å New York City Deferred Compensation��Å North Carolina

assets advanced by 117.4%.Target-date fund assets

in DC plans grew faster than aggregate DC assets.

For the 200 largest re-tirement plans, the total DC component rose 4.6% to $2.58 trillion vs. $2.47 trillion in the previous survey. Over fi ve years, to-tal DC assets rose 44.4%.

The gains were similar for the DC component of the 1,000 largest retire-ment plans: up 4% to $4.26 trillion vs. the previous survey and up 41% over fi ve years.

If a rising DC tide lifted all boats, target-date funds occupied the second-big-gest boat for both corpo-rate DC and public DC plans.

For DC assets in the 200 largest corporate retirement plans, domestic equity — exclud-ing company stock — had the largest pres-ence with 32% of assets vs. 34.6% in the previ-ous survey. Company stock contributed 10.2% vs. 12.7%.

For public plans, domestic equity domi-nated with a 40.9% allocation vs 43% for the previous survey.

Most DC assetsThe plans with the largest amounts of DC

assets are: Thrift Savings Plan, Washington, with $601 billion as of Sept. 30, up 3.8% from the previous year; AT&T Inc., Dallas, with $68.1 billion, up 4%; and The Boeing Co., Chi-cago, with $66.3 billion, up 3.6%.

As overall DC plan assets grow, much of the infl ows are going to target-date funds thanks to auto features and target-date

funds’ dominance as a qualifi ed default invest-ment alternative.

“As people change jobs, they are more likely to be auto enrolled in a target-date fund than fi ve years ago or 10 years ago,” said Drew Carrington, senior vice president and head of the defi ned contribu-tion business at Franklin Templeton Investments, San Mateo, Calif.

“Many plans default people from day one” into QDIAs, of which target-date funds are overwhelmingly domi-nant, said Winfi eld Evens, Charlotte, N.C.-based vice president of investment solutions and strategy for Alight Solutions. “We ex-pect the trend to continue.”

Alight Solutions’ 2019 annual report for its

401(k) index looked at aggregate contribu-tions for 13 asset classes. Target-date funds accounted for 47%, dwarfi ng second-place large cap U.S. equity (20%) and third-place international equity (7%).

Among the asset classes, target-date funds placed fi rst with 29.3% of account balances, followed by large-cap U.S. equity (26%) and stable value (9.5%). Target-date funds over-took large-cap equity as the leader in 2015.

The index tracks daily investment activ-ity of more than 2 million 401(k) participants who have approximately $200 billion in re-tirement assets. The index covers employees of large-plan clients of Alight, but the com-pany doesn’t identify the number of plans.

The use of target-date funds “does skew to-ward younger participants,” easily surpassing contributions to other asset categories among clients at Rocaton Investment Advisors, Nor-walk, Conn., said Jeri Savage, principal and

head of defi ned contribution research.Because equity still plays a major role in

plan menus and because fi xed income offers diversifi cation, Ms. Savage said clients offer a mixture of passive and active strategies

for both equity and fi xed income. “Our plans have passive building blocks,” she said. “It’s more obvious with equity. It’s a cost issue.”

Her fi rm also recommends that plans of-fer more fi xed-income choices. “Active and

DC fundsCONTINUED FROM PAGE 17

In an equity bull market approaching its11th year anniversary, it was the performanceof bonds in the 12 months ended Sept. 30that provided the best market growth fordefined contribution plans, according to Pen-sions & Investments’ annual survey of thelargest U.S. retirement plans.

For the 12 months ended Sept. 30, indexbond assets rose to $59.2 billion, up 17.9%from the previous survey period for DC plansamong the 200 largest retirement plans.Passive equity assets rose only 0.1% to$539.3 billion.

However, over a fi ve-year period, indexbond assets advanced 30.1% while passiveindex equities gained 43.4%. The recent bondbonanza period included the fourth quarter of2018, when equity markets were slaughteredas the S&P 500 index lost 13.97%. For theyear ended Sept. 30, the Bloomberg BarclaysU.S. Aggregate Bond index was up 10.3%,while the S&P 500 ended up 4.25%.

During the P&I survey period, amongcorporate DC plans in the largest 200 U.S.retirement plans, the allocation to fi xedincome rose to 6.1% vs. 5% a year earlier. Stable value took 10.5%, up from 10.1% andinflation-protection securities edged up to0.6% from 0.5%.

For public plans, the results were similar: fi xed income rose to 6.2% from 5.5%; stablevalue advanced to 15.6% from 14.8%; andinflation-protected securities rose to 0.4%from 0.3%.

However, some research indicates thatparticipants’ purchasing of fi xed-income fundsis a strategic rather than a panic response.

Among 401(k) plans’ trading inflows lastyear, 55% went to bond funds, 27% went tostable value funds and 13% went to money market funds, said a report of the Alight Solu-tions 401(k) index.

The index reflects daily investment activityof more than 2 million 401(k) plan partici-pants who have about $200 billion in retire-ment assets; it defines trading fl ows as mov-ing assets from one asset class to another.

Asset classes with the most trading out-fl ows were large-cap U.S. equity funds (49%),company stock (34%) and small-cap U.S.equity funds (8%).

“This activity seems to suggest that peoplewere rebalancing their portfolios (but) notmaking drastic changes to their investmentmix,” said the Alight report. Last year, 401(k)participants “largely took a more thoughtfuland less reactionary approach to investingthan in past years.”

Callan LLC, San Francisco, noted that dur-ing the three months ended Sept. 30, “U.S.fi xed income saw the largest inflows for thequarter (57.7%), the fi rst time this has oc-curred since the third quarter of 2010,” saida report on the fi rm’s quarterly DC index.

The largest percentage of outflows forthe quarter came from U.S. large-cap eq-uity (52.2%) and U.S. small/midcap equity(19.1%), “perhaps signaling investors’ desire

Passive bonds displaying vibrance despite era of go-go stock market

Growth of target-date strategies in DC plansAmong the top 200 funds; assets are in billions as of Sept. 30.

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

$400

201920182017201620152014

TotalCustomOff-the-shelf



ESOPsRank Fund Assets


2 Publix Super Markets $8,122



5 Consolidated Edison $102

Profit-sharing funds

Rank Fund Assets

1 Deloitte $7,108

2 Intel $6,598

3 Southwest Airlines $5,419

4 National Elevator Industry $2,790

5 Electrical Ind., Joint Board $1,837

Funds with the most DC assets intarget-date strategiesAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Rank FundTotalassets

Customstrategies

Off-the-shelf

1 Federal Retirement Thrift $127,317 $127,317

2 Kaiser $11,417 $11,417

3 Intel $10,506 $10,506

4 California University $10,041 $10,041

5 National Electric $9,066 $9,066

6 United Continental Holdings $8,134 $1,550 $6,584

7 American Airlines $7,448 $7,448

8 J.P. Morgan Chase $6,470 $6,470

9 IBM $6,429 $5,884 $545

10 Northrop Grumman $6,146 $6,146

11 North Carolina $5,797 $5,797

12 Costco Wholesale $5,200 $5,200


14 Florida State Board $5,122 $5,122


16 Exelon $4,875 $4,875

17 CenturyLink $4,651 $4,651

18 Deloitte $4,460 $4,460

19 Merck $4,321 $4,321

20 National Rural Electric $4,173

Funds with DC plans offering stand-alone retirement income optionsAmong the top 200 funds as of Sept. 30.

Funds with DC plans using an external cybersecurity vendorAmong the top 200 funds as of Sept. 30.

��Å Colorado Employees��Å Costco Wholesale��Å Walt Disney��Å Illinois State Board

��Å Indiana Public Retirement��Å Intel��Å New Jersey��Å New York State

Deferred Compensation��Å Oregon Public Employees��Å United Technologies

��Å Alabama Retirement��Å Illinois State Board

��Å Indiana Public Retirement

��Å Ohio Deferred Compensation

Funds with the most DC assets inpassive equityAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Rank Fund Assets


2 IBM $26,845






8 American Airlines $8,421


10 Honeywell $6,850

Rank Fund Assets

11 Citigroup $6,820


13 Caterpillar $4,635


15 Deloitte $3,857

16 Accenture $3,805

17 Los Angeles Co. Deferred $3,792




Funds with the most DC assets ininflation-protected securitiesAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Rank Fund Assets

1 IBM $1,984

2 American Airlines $1,053

3 Wespath UMC $487

4 New York City Def. Comp. $427

5 North Carolina $407

6 J.P. Morgan Chase $382



9 National Electric $344

10 California University $309

Rank Fund Assets

11 United Technologies $287

12 Tennessee Consolidated $283

13 Target $271

14 Exelon $249

15 Citigroup $179

16 Indiana Public Retirement $174

17 California Savings Plus $167

18 New Jersey $132

19 Prudential Financial $116

20 S. Carolina Public Employees $113

Funds with the most DC assets in REITsAssets are in millions as of Sept. 30.

Rank Fund Assets

1 IBM $1,667

2 Los Angeles Co. Deferred $327

3 J.P. Morgan Chase $282

4 California University $267

5 Eli Lilly $240

6 Corteva $239


8 Accenture $184

9 Citigroup $144

10 Deloitte $143

Rank Fund Assets

11 United Technologies $139

12 Exelon $137

13 Honeywell $129

14 Ohio State Teachers $125

15 Virginia Retirement $107

16 Pentegra $92

17 National Electric $83

18 Wespath UMC $74

19 S. Carolina Public Employees $55


��Å Ohio Deferred Compensation��Å Oregon Public Employees��Å Pentegra��Å Target��Å United Continental Holdings��Å United Technologies��Å Virginia Retirement��Å Wespath UMC

to shift to relatively safer asset classes,” Callan said.

Consultants and re-searchers say the strategic reasons for boosting bond balances vary from par-ticipants doing some profi t-taking to older participants seeking to reduce risk.

“I think it’s partly due to rebalancing,” said Drew Carrington, senior vice president and head of the defi ned contribution busi-ness at Franklin Templeton Investments, San Mateo, Calif.

Some participants are saying, “I had a good run so I’ll take a little off the table” from equities, he added. Others are saying “I’m older so I am looking for less risk.” The S&P 500 index gained 30.4% for the 12 months ended Dec. 31.

More assets going into fi xed income also might refl ect plans’ decisions to offer more fi xed-income options because plans’ menusoften tilt heavily to equity vs. fi xed income, saidWylie Tollette, executive vice president and headof client investment solutions for Franklin Tem-pleton’s multiasset solutions group.

Emily Wrightson, who focuses on public DC plan clients, said she has seen “more of a focus” by clients on actively managed fi xed-income options due to low interest rates. Still, her clients offer both active and passive fi xed-income options, said Ms. Wrightson, aNew York-based vice president at Cammack

Retirement Group.P&I data shows that

some corporate sponsors with the biggest amounts of passively managed bonds experienced healthy passive bond asset gains, according to the P&I survey.

The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board, Washington, reported a 19.3% increase in index bonds to $33 billion vs. the previous survey out of total DC assets of $601 billion for the 12 months ended Sept. 30. Its passive bond assets were nine times larger than the second-big-gest user of index bonds, International Business Ma-chines Corp., Armonk, N.Y., whose index bond assets rose 11% to $3.6 billion out of total DC assets of $53.6 billion.

Northrup Grumman Corp., Falls Church, Va., reported $2.8 billion passive bonds, a 19.52% increase over the previous survey. Total DC as-sets as of Sept. 30 were $29.2 billion.

“We see a split” in sponsors’ fi xed-income strategies, said Winfi eld Evens, the Charlotte, N.C.-based vice president investment solutionsand strategy for Alight Solutions. Passive funds have lower fees but actively managed funds can offer better results in a low-interest-rate environment. “I don’t see sponsors kicking out actively managed (fi xed-income) funds,” Mr. Evens said.

— ROBERT STEYER

Growth of indexed bonds in DC fundsAmong the top 200 funds; assets are in billions as of Sept. 30.

$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

$60

$70

$80

201920182017201620152014

passive fi xed income each play a distinct role,” she said.

Consultants said equity plays a strong role in public DC plans because participants in these plans also may be enrolled in a defi ned

benefi t plan. “If you have a DB plan, you cantake on more risk,” said Greg Ungerman, se-nior vice president and defi ned contribution practice leader for Callan LLC, San Francis-co. “The pension is a big bond.” �


Investing in funds that focus on companies addressing environ-mental, social and governance fac-tors apparently is not part of the New York state of mind — nor that of other defined contribution plans participating in Pensions & Invest-ments’ 2019 survey of the 1,000 larg-est U.S. retirement plans.

Of the 106 sponsors who re-sponded to the question on wheth-er they offer ESG investments, only 14 said yes.

One such plan, the New York State Deferred Compensation Plan, a $25.7 billion retirement plan for state employees, has offered an ESG fund in its investment lineup for at least 20 years, but few partici-pants have invested in it. Through the end of December, only 1.6% of the plan’s 245,000 participants were invested in the fund, allocating $38.1 million to it, just 0.15% of the plan’s total assets.

“It is my best guess that partici-pants want to maximize their re-turns,” David Fischer, executive di-rector of the plan, Albany, said of the modest uptake of the ESG in-vestment offering. “Although ESG sponsored funds speak of excess returns, which may over some fu-ture term be true, it hasn’t generally shown up yet.”

Most defined contribution plan sponsors aren’t willing to wait. In fact, most are not including ESG in-vestment options in their lineups at

all, fearing their perceived higher cost, lack of performance track re-cord and potential fiduciary liabili-ty, industry practitioners say.

In a survey of 240 defined contri-bution plan sponsors last year, Alight Solutions found that only 7% offered ESG funds in their plan lineups, and the overwhelming ma-jority — 89% — said they had no plans to add them to their lineups.

“While plan sponsors do care about ESG, they place a greater em-phasis on performance and price,” said Anna Fang, research analyst at Cerulli Associates in Boston, noting that sponsors are concerned about lawsuits.

Shawn O’Brien, a senior analyst also at Cerulli in Boston, added that because many ESG products are new they “don’t have a long-term established performance record for which advisers and plan sponsors can go on to evaluate.”

Plus, Mr. O’Brien said, ESG prod-ucts are generally seen as more ex-pensive than their non-ESG, plain vanilla passive counterparts.

Less expensiveThe relatively few plan sponsors

that do offer ESG investment op-tions offer them through stand-alone “thematic” mutual funds or index funds, which are also less ex-pensive.

The New York State Deferred Compensation plan, for example, offers participants the Pax Global Environmental Markets Fund, an equity fund that invests in compa-nies working to address environ-mental challenges.

The New York plan has offered the fund since the third quarter of 2018. Before that, it offered the Pax

World Balanced Fund, which was available since at least 2006.

The Pax Global Environmental Markets Fund has the highest ex-pense ratio of all the funds offered in the plan’s lineup, Mr. Fischer said. He added that the plan’s in-vestment adviser hasn’t made him aware of any particular concerns with regard to the fund’s perfor-mance results.

The Wisconsin Deferred Com-pensation Program, a $5.6 billion supplementary 457 defined contri-bution plan, likewise offers its 65,000 participants an ESG-focused index fund called the Calvert U.S. Large-Cap Core Responsible index, managed by Calvert Research and Management.

Through the end of December, some 3,300 plan participants had

invested $67.2 million in the fund, 1.18% of the plan’s total assets.

The plan has included a socially responsible fund in its lineup since 2003, according to Shelly Schueller, the program’s Madison, Wis.-based director. The option has changed several times over the years “based on investment performance, which the board monitors regularly.”

The fund had the highest ex-pense ratio of all index funds in the plan’s lineup but posted the great-est 10-year investment return, ac-cording to an investment perfor-mance report as of Sept. 30.

ESG investments are highly un-likely to be embedded into or pack-aged as a target-date fund, accord-ing to industry experts. “Most target-date providers aren’t incor-porating ESG into their target-date

underlying strategies,” Cerulli’s Mr. O’Brien said. “Generally speaking, it’s not usually being incorporated through a target-date approach or as a default investment.”

Natixis, a pioneer in ESG target-date funds, is one of the few provid-ers that incorporates ESG into its target-date funds, Ms. Fang said.

Plan sponsors, Mr. O’Brien said, tend to think that if participants want to invest in ESG products, they can do so through a brokerage window.

Of course, there are exceptions, among them the United World Col-lege-USA, a college founded by in-dustrialist Armand Hammer in Montezuma, N.M. In July 2018, the college added an ESG target-date fund to its $3.4 million 403(b) plan and set the new fund as the default investment option.

The college’s new LongView ESG target-date investments were built using custom model portfolios on TIAA-CREF’s platform, said Doug-las Lynam, partner at LongView As-set Management LLC, a registered investment adviser and ESG fidu-ciary based in Santa Fe, N.M.

The component funds of the LongView ESG TDF-like portfolios include three from Dimensional Fund Advisors L.P. – DFA U.S. Sus-tainability Core I; DFA Internation-al Sustainability Core 1; and DFA Emerging Markets Sustainability Core I. It also includes TIAA-CREF’s Social Choice Bond Fund.

Mr. Lynam said he believed that the UWC 403(b) plan was the first to use a target-date ESG product and the first to use it as the default investment option.

“We’re really proud of it,” he said. “We hope it’s a trendsetter.” n

Most DC plans believe ESG not yet ready for prime timeTHE P&I 1000 ESG IN DC

Focus on performance, fees moving ESG to back of line for most plans

By MARGARIDA CORREIA

assessment was deliberate. “The FCA doesn’t want managers to col-lude,” he said.

In the first half of 2020, the FCA will be examining managers’ efforts to assess if: n Their funds’ performance was

in line with benchmarks. n They have been providing in-

vestors with quality services. n Their funds could benefit from

merging. n Their fund fees and third-par-

ty costs could be reduced. n They offered investors rates

and services comparable with mar-ket rates and services. n They adopted fair fee struc-

tures for all types of investors.

Senior exec responsibleThose responsible for value as-

sessment reports are senior execu-tives appointed by money manage-ment firms under the Senior Manager and Certification Regime, a separate U.K. regulation that took effect Dec. 9. The new law, among other rules, has armed the FCA with a power to fine individual di-rectors at money management firms if they failed to show how they have protected their investors’ interests.

Sources said the FCA’s push is aimed at leading managers to re-duce annual management fees

and third-party costs as well as identifying to their investors how well each of their funds is per-forming. The FCA is particularly targeting managers that sell pas-sive funds disguised as active funds, known as “closet trackers,” sources added.

Steve Kenny, commercial director at Square Mile In-vestment Consult-ing & Research Ltd. in London, said the FCA wants to im-prove how manag-ers are communicat-ing to investors in fund fact sheets be-cause often “funds’ objectives in pro-spectuses are too opaque and they are incomprehensible for investors.”

Mr. Kenny added that with managers having to assess the performance vs. fund objectives, they may start to question if they need six or seven U.K. equity funds. “If you consolidate them into one, the fund costs would come down for investors,” he said.

Mr. Kenny, whose firm was hired to develop a value report for Rath-bone Unit Trust Management Ltd., highlighted that the assessment of Rathbone’s strategies made the firm identify underperforming funds and make changes to its of-fering.

Rathbone, which had £7.4 bil-lion ($9.7 billion) in assets under management as of Dec. 31, said in its value report that “significant resource” had to be invested to ad-dress the FCA’s value assessment criteria. The manager subsequent-ly switched all of its retail inves-

tors into institu-tional funds, moving investors into a cheaper share class.

Mike Webb, Lon-don-based CEO of Rathbone Unit Trust Management Ltd., said in a telephone interview that the firm identified two funds to be under-performing their re-spective bench-marks due to significant exposure to U.K. stocks, im-pacted by the uncer-tainty resulting from

the U.K.’s departure from the Euro-pean Union.

One fund, Rathbone Global Al-pha Fund, which had AUM of £121 million as of Dec. 31, delivered a 60.19% return over five years through Dec. 31 vs. 62.88% returned by its benchmark. Mr. Webb said the fund’s only client chose to ter-minate Rathbone as a manager, and the fund will close in 2020. He de-clined to name the client.

Also, Rathbone U.K. Opportuni-ties Fund, with AUM of £47 million

as of Dec. 31, underperformed its benchmark FTSE All-Share index over a three- and five-year period, returning 18.48% and 43.04%, re-spectively, vs. 22.01% and 43.84% by the index.

In the value assessment report, the firm said that the U.K. Oppor-tunities Fund fell 19.3% during the fourth quarter of 2018, compared to the FTSE All-Share index’s 10.3% fall, noting that the impact on performance will be felt over a five-year period until 2022. Mr. Webb said Rathbone’s board de-cided the U.K. Opportunities Fund annual management fee should be kept at 45 basis points until perfor-mance is back on track. The firm relaunched the Rathbone Recov-ery Fund as U.K. Opportunities Fund and reduced its fee to 45 ba-sis points from 75 basis points in 2017.

Beyond performanceOther sources said managers will

be focusing on aspects other than performance of the FCA’s value as-sessment criteria.

For example, Columbia Thread-needle Investments stopped charg-ing performance fees on Jan. 1, 2020, for a number of its funds, in-cluding Threadneedle U.K. Abso-lute Alpha Fund, Threadneedle U.K. Extended Alpha Fund and Threadneedle (Lux) American Ex-tended Alpha.“We have decided to stop charging performance fees on the funds as part of our commit-ment to ensure that our fees are

fair, simple and transparent,” the firm said on its website.

After May 7, Columbia Thread-needle will also reduce annual management fees on a mix of five other equity and bond funds due to “commitment to giving the unit-holders value for money over the long term,” its website said.

For Mike Zelouf, director of Eu-ropean and Middle East business at Western Asset Management Co. LLC in London, the FCA’s require-ments should also force active management firms to review the practice of passing costs onto in-vestors from third-party firms such as custodians or auditors. Some firms levy non-management fees as part of total fund charges that in-vestors pay as a percentage of fund’s value as opposed to a nomi-nal charge, he said.

Sources said that overall, firms may struggle to fully disclose to would-be investors what rates are paid by existing clients, without be-ing concerned about their future profitability.

Noting an ongoing discussion among U.K. managers about the de-gree of fee disclosure, Ingrid Holmes, head of public policy and advocacy at the international busi-ness of Federated Hermes Inc. in London, said in a telephone inter-view money managers may initially set lower fees when launching a new fund to attract assets.

“When you are launching a new strategy, it can be at a loss,” she said by way of example. n

FCACONTINUED FROM PAGE 2

COST SHIFTING: Mike Zelouf said the FCA directive will force active managers to look closely at fees they pass on to clients.

FEAR OF THE LAW: Anna Fang sees sponsor concerns over potential legal liability as another factor that is inhibiting the inclusion of ESG options in many DC plans.

Loreen Kelley


For a full list of webinars, go to pionline.com/webinars

UPCOMING WEBINARS | REGISTER TODAY

A Fresh Look at Risk ParityThough solidified in 2019 thanks to the stock market rally, pension plan funded levels remain a challenge. But help is on the way. Breakthroughs in risk parity benchmarking have led to new insights into and applica-tions of risk parity in institutional portfolios. This webinar will help plan sponsors of any size better understand both the risk and opportunity of integrating active or passive risk parity into their portfolios. Featuring the CIO of a major public pension plan who’s embraced risk parity, the discussion will cover risk parity from contemplation to implementation.

Stream at: pionline.com/WilshireWebinarSponsored by:

U.S. Real Estate Outlook - Cycles and SupercyclesLive: Wednesday, February 12 | 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm ET

U.S. real estate performed well in 2019, with vacancy rates dropping to historic lows and rent growth advancing at a healthy clip. But real estate lagged behind other asset classes from an investment perspective. Could this be a sign that the market has peaked? To the contrary, in our view.

While low interest rates propelled gains across many investments last year, we believe they have yet to be fully priced into real estate, creating upside potential for 2020. Still, a favorable overall outlook masks sharp disparities within the market: the gap between the best- and worst-performing sectors, Industrial and Retail respectively, has reached its widest level in 25 years. Divergence is also widening across subsectors and geographies.

Register now: pionline.com/DWSWebinarSponsored by:

New Report: China Asset Allocation Trends in Today’s Environment Live, Wednesday, February 26 • 2:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. ET

New research from Greenwich and Matthews Asia reveals that almost 50% of institutional investors plan to make a dedicated allocation to China’s equity markets. However, many have not yet implemented those plans. Why not? Their reasons are centered on events such as the recent outbreak of Wuhan Coronavirus and perceived shortcomings in China’s corporate governance standards.

Please join Andy Rothman, Matthews Asia investment strategist, as he offers his unique take on the virus, including the government’s response and the possible impact on China’s economy. Andy lived in China during the 2002/2003 SARS outbreak and can draw important parallels. In addition, Greenwich research leader Dan Connell and Matthews Asia ESG analyst Kathlyn Collins will discuss the global study results and take a deep dive into improvements — and remaining gaps — in China’s corporate governance standards.

Register now: pionline.com/MatthewsAsiaWebinar

Sponsored by:

tem, said the Harrisburg-based plan “changed quite radically after the great financial crisis.”

A 70% allocation to equities and negative cash flows led to an ap-proximately 40% drawdown in the portfolio and forced selling when the crisis hit.

Knowing the plan could not af-ford a repeat of that experience, PennPSERS has since moved to a more balanced portfolio construction to reduce vola-tility.

Now, “our concern is that the next downturn will be both deeper and longer than previous downturns, which will put stress on our em-ployers for additional contri-butions at a time when tax revenues are challenged,” he said.

He added that with inter-est rates as low as they are, the diversification benefits from the fixed income within the portfolio “won’t be a great as in previous drawdowns.”

‘Meaningful changes’Laurie Martin, recently

appointed CIO of the $35.9 billion Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust Funds, Hartford, said in an email that the state has “made meaningful changes to better man-age risks and provide a better level of protection against future down-turns.”

For example, the treasurer’s of-fice has lowered the rate of return assumptions to 6.9% from 8%, put new asset allocations in place and added a risk posture “to take advan-tage of all differentiated sources of return in the future, through any

cycle.” One CIO who was there during

the global financial crisis and re-mains in the role told P&I what he did to better prepare for stormier climes. David Villa, CIO and execu-tive director of State Wisconsin In-vestment Board, Madison, said the $111.5 billion Wisconsin Retire-ment System adopted a risk-shar-ing structure where participants bear a lot more risk than most other traditional state plans.

Wisconsin’s plan, which Mr. Villa describes as “very liquid,” was allo-

cated to about 66% equities (risky) and 34% fixed income (safe hedges) in 2009. Now, through leverage, it’s 64% equities and 46% fixed income.

Many consultants said they weren’t sure that being a CIO with firsthand experience during the global financial crisis was that es-sential — just because they’re new to the CIO or CEO role at their cur-rent plan doesn’t mean they’re in-experienced.

“They’ve been in leadership po-sitions in other organizations or have worked with leadership for a

while, so I’m not sure it’s that dra-matic,” said James A. Callahan, president of Callan LLC, San Fran-cisco.

For another, there’s still a level of continuity in place.

“What should give everyone comfort is that the vast majority of those have served roles both inside and outside the public sector that make them very well qualified to manage these funds,” Aon’s Mr. Comstock said.

“These folks tend to surround themselves with a certain level of

expertise,” Mr. Comstock added. “So, while the CIO may not have been with the organization since the global financial crisis, many are surrounded by those who were, so there’s some conti-nuity in place.”

Jay Love, a partner and se-nior consultant in the Atlanta office of Mercer Investments, said he’s not sure it matters if a CIO experienced the global financial crisis firsthand as much as if they can “step back and see the big picture.”

And some, like Segal Mar-co Advisors’ CIO Tim Barron, expressed optimism over the next generation of plan lead-ers, noting that their ability to access data far exceeds

that of the baby boomer generation. “The millennial generation is so

facile with data, and has so much access to it,” Mr. Barron said.

What’s really important is whether plans are able to make more opportunistic investments during a bear market.

Brian McDonnell, global head of pensions at Cambridge Associates LLC, Boston, said several asset owners want to learn how to go on offense in addition to establishing a good defense.

“When I reflect on what it was

Post-crisisCONTINUED FROM PAGE 3

BOTH WORLDS: Brian McDonnell said it’s hard to be on the offense when you also want a good defense.

from 46% and boosted fixed income to 28% from 20%.

But pension officials also elimi-nated its 9% inflation assets alloca-tion, which had also invested in some fixed-income-type instru-ments and commodities. The infla-tion portfolio was liquidated as of February 2019, according to CalP-ERS agenda materials.

Real estate and private equity re-tained their target allocations of 13% and 8%, respectively, while its liquid portfolio, made up of cash and other short-term instruments, was cut by 3 percentage points to 4%.

A month before the investment committee adopted the strategic as-set allocation in November 2017, it lowered the credit quality of its liq-uid portfolio to BBB from predomi-nantly BBB+.

The change was intended “to ex-pand the investment universe around government-guaranteed instruments,” said Wylie Tollette, who was then CalPERS’ chief oper-ating investment officer. “And the fundamental logic is that a govern-ment-guaranteed instrument has a fundamentally lower level of credit risk than a corporate instrument.”

Cash accounted for 0.8% of CalP-ERS’ total plan assets as of Sept. 30 vs. 4.3% as of Sept. 30, 2016, P&I data show.

On balance, CalPERS’ strategic

asset allocation increased the pen-sion plan’s combined stock-and-bond target to 78% from 75%, which is reflected in the asset mix shifts CalPERS has reported to P&I over the past three years.

Turning an ocean linerCalPERS staff and investment

consultants have stressed in open sessions that it is difficult for the system to increase its exposure to alternative investments, in part, due to its size.

At a recent meeting, Mr. Meng re-peated that CalPERS’ size is “a dou-

ble-edged sword.” CalPERS cannot invest in private asset classes, in-cluding private equity, at the scale it needs with the traditional commin-gled investment model, he said.

“In general, institutional inves-tors are allocating more money to-ward private assets and less money toward public assets. And real es-tate is one of the places to which that new increased allocation goes,” said David Glickman, executive vice president at Meketa Invest-ment Group Inc., CalPERS’ real es-tate consultant, at investment com-mittee’s February 2019 meeting. “In

CalPERSCONTINUED FROM PAGE 3

CalPERS plans to build out an opportunistic investment program and take a serious look at active risk, among other initiatives, in fiscal 2020.

The $384.4 billion California Public Employees’ Retirement System, Sacramento, is aiming to create a program to make investments “that present themselves across asset classes, where there may be some structural anomalies in the market or there’s a meaningful dislocation in the market,” said Rose Dean, a managing director

at general investment consultant Wilshire Consulting, at an investment committee meeting in August.

The opportunistic strategies, funded across asset classes, are expected to enhance the pension fund’s total fund risk-adjusted returns, she said.

In fiscal year 2020, the investment committee and staff also are attempting to sort out the active risk in the portfolio, said Eric Baggesen, managing investment director, trust level portfolio management.

CalPERS puts opportunistic program on fund’s to-do list


actually like in 2008, 2009, the amount of time spent on the over-sight of existing managers doubled during the crisis,” Mr. McDonnell said. “People rightfully want to think of how to go on offense, and that’s absolutely the right instinct, but you may not have the time to do that. For those who remember, free time to seek opportunities was not in abundance.”

This is why it’s important to have a system in place that allows such opportunistic investing during the tough times.

‘Difficult to pull the trigger’“It’s difficult to pull the trigger

(on risky investments) when mar-kets are down 20% and you have a liquidity crunch,” Mr. Comstock said. “But if you have mechanism already in place, you’ve thought about this in calmer times, that would be what we would recom-mend.”

Mr. Comstock added: “Sometimes the best time to deploy capital is when things look their worst.”

That makes having access to li-quidity critical.

“Planning ahead for liquidity needs is a fundamental need in cri-ses and downturns,” Mr. Love said.

Callan’s Mr. Callahan agreed. “One of the biggest lessons learned is a much greater focus on liquidity,” he said. “A lot of asset owners un-derestimated the liquidity in their portfolios, fixed income being a good example. Those markets dried up and it became very difficult to liquidate parts of the portfolio. This meant they had to sell public equity, which was less than ideal.”

Ultimately, plans have been ade-quately stress testing their portfoli-os and appear to have learned the lessons demonstrating the impor-tance of liquidity. But Cambridge Associates’ Mr. McDonnell thinks there’s a larger concern for plans

going forward.“People have learned the lessons

around liquidity stress testing,” Mr.

McDonnell said. “The bigger topic of conversation is more about what happens in the next 10 years if my

expected rate of return is 7% to 8% and I only make 4% to 5%. What am I doing in my portfolio to try to im-

prove that outcome? It really is about having a realistic view of re-turns.” n

Whether their CIOs are relatively new to the position, or veterans of many market cycles, public pension funds told Pensions & Invest-ments about their efforts to be proactive and try to ensure they’re ready for a bear market or other such crisis.

James H. Grossman Jr., CIO of the $58 billion Pennsylvania Public School Employees’ Retirement System, said that before the global financial crisis, the Harrisburg-based plan “had such a high concentration of equities ... to generate the type of returns we needed to offset limited employer payments.”

Just prior to the crisis, PennPSERS allocated about 70% to equities and 30% to fixed income and real assets. When the crisis hit, the plan’s assets fell to $42 billion from around $70 billion due to its concentration in equities, which lost 50% of their value, and the negative cash flow of the fund. PennPSERS wound up selling 8% of its assets to meet its cash-flow needs.

“Essentially, having most of our eggs in one basket entering the financial crisis led to large investment losses,” said Mr. Grossman, who has been CIO of PennPSERS since 2014. “The large losses, coupled with our excessive negative cash flow, exacerbated the asset decline of the fund.”

Knowing the plan could not afford a repeat of that drawdown, PennPSERS has since moved to a more balanced portfolio construction to reduce volatility.

“So today, we’ve diversified our baskets so if one egg is not performing well in a period, we hope the others are performing well,” Mr. Grossman said in an email. “Still, we under-stand our diversification will not generate ultra-high returns in an equity-fueled bull market like we’ve been experiencing. Conversely, we

don’t expect to suffer as much if or when the bull run ends as it did briefly in December 2018.”

Looking forward, Mr. Grossman said he has concerns over the depth and length of a future downturn.

“We still have negative cash flow, which can erode assets over a prolonged market downturn,” he said. “Our concern is that the next downturn will be both deeper and longer than previous downturns, which will put stress on our employers for additional contributions at a time when tax revenues are challenged.”

He added that with interest rates as low as they are, the diversification benefits from the fixed income within the portfolio “won’t be a great as in previous drawdowns.”

Laurie Martin, recently appointed CIO of the $35.9 billion Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust Funds, Hartford, said in an email that the state has “put in place new asset allocations and a risk posture to ensure we can take advantage of all differentiated sources of return in the future, through any cycle.” She cited implementing greater diversification, decreasing its exposure to global equities and increasing its allocation to fixed income as ways the pension fund is mitigating risk.

Knowing that the next crisis won’t be the same as the last, Ms. Martin stressed the need to be nimble.

“We know every downturn is different, so as long-term investors, we have to plan for the unexpected,” Ms. Martin added. “That means prudently building a diversified investment

portfolio and always stress testing to ensure we are remaining true to our long-term targets.”

Connecticut Treasurer Shawn T. Wooden appointed Ms. Martin as the CIO in June.

One CIO who was there during the global financial crisis told P&I what he did to better prepare for uncertain times. David Villa, CIO and executive director of State Wisconsin Investment Board, Madison, said the $111.5 billion Wisconsin Retirement System adopted a risk-sharing structure that puts more of the return risk

on participants.If the plan earns more than 5%, employees

receive an extra benefit. If it earns less than 5%, they get a smaller benefit. And that excess goes into an annuity on top of their base benefit. The cost-of-living adjustment has to be earned.

“What we learned in the crisis is we need to build a race car for a race track that is 20% tight curves and 80% straightaway,” said Mr. Villa, who has been CIO since 2006 and executive director since 2018. “And our race car tends to go slower during the straightaway and faster on the curves.”

Wisconsin’s plan, which Mr. Villa describes as “very liquid,” was allocated to about 66% equities (risky) and 34% fixed income (safe hedges) in 2009. Now, through leverage, it’s 64% equities and 46% fixed income.

“That’s my race car that goes fast on the curve and slow on the straightaway,” Mr. Villa said.

— JAMES COMTOIS

Experience not necessary to gird for market mishaps

NEVER AGAIN: James H. Grossman Jr. said PennPSERS made changes to avoid a repeat of big market losses.

addition, the performance of real estate has been reasonably good.”

But while CalPERS has advan-tages in the market, particularly scale and structure, it is not alone seeking real estate projects in which to invest, he noted.

“There are a lot of people who are also bidding for the same prop-erties that you have,” resulting in CalPERS’ real estate portfolio being smaller than its allocation, Mr. Glickman said.

By the end of its 2019 fiscal year, CalPERS had completed the transi-tion to the strategic allocation ad-

opted in December 2017, Eric Baggesen, managing investment director, trust level portfolio man-agement, told the investment com-mittee.

“The primary accomplishment is moving the structure of the asset allocation to what was approved by the board in December of 2017,” Mr. Baggesen told the investment com-mittee at its August meeting. “There was almost $150 billion of trading activity that took place over the (fis-cal) year of 2018-’19. There were quite a lot of changes that hap-pened in the structure of the in-

vestment portfolio.”

Factor-weighted equitiesThe pension fund’s strategic as-

set allocation implementation in-cluded 15% to a new factor-weight-ed equity portfolio as well as 35% in capitalization-weighted equities and 8% in private equity, which to-gether make up its 58% growth portfolio. CalPERS funded its fac-tor-weighted equity portfolio from its cap-weighted portfolio.

CalPERS also carved out a new 3% allocation to high yield from its 28% fixed-income portfolio. Fixed

income also includes 15% in long-spread issues and 10% in long Trea-sury bonds.

CalPERS had $72.4 billion in fac-tor-weighted equities as of Sept. 30, up 478.9% since Sept. 30, 2017, when the pension fund first report-ed assets invested in the strategy. The second-largest factor-based al-location in P&I’s survey was the $82.4 billion Oregon Public Em-ployees Retirement Fund, Tigard, with $8 billion.

Active emerging markets debt was up 603.8% to $14.9 billion from a year earlier, when CalPERS first reported emerging market debt as-sets. CalPERS has no passive emerging markets debt.

CalPERS reported zero in infla-tion-protected securities, down from $11.1 billion a year earlier and $17.4 billion as of Sept. 30, 2016. Meanwhile, consistent with its new strategic asset allocation, cash was down 75.6% to $3.2 billion in the three years ended Sept. 30. Com-modities dropped to zero from $4.5 billion as of Sept. 30, 2016.

Real estate investment trusts, which are part of the equity portfo-lio, dropped 69.6% to $8.2 billion from Sept. 30, 2017. CalPERS had not reported REIT assets as of Sept. 30, 2016.

In alternatives, infrastructure in-creased the most, by 57.1% to $4.8 billion in the three years ended Sept. 30, followed by international real estate, a 52.1% increase to $2.9 billion. CalPERS does have some exposure to private credit, with a 731.1% increase in bank loans to

$374 million in the two years since Sept. 30, 2018.

However, direct hedge funds are down 45.5% to $181 million during the three-year period ended Sept. 30 and its timber portfolio is down 33.3% to $1.3 billion from three years earlier. The drop in timber re-flects a sale of its Crown Pine tim-ber portfolio.

Late-cycle investingAt an educational investment

committee meeting in December, Mr. Meng had explained how for many asset owners, the late part of an economic cycle is exactly when they should be investing in income-producing assets such as private credit, fixed income and real estate.

“The later part of the cycle prob-ably you prefer more income-driv-en strategy than capital-apprecia-tion strategy,” he said.

“For example, our real estate is core U.S. real estate,” Mr. Meng said. “The bulk of the expected return is coming from income — an income-driven strategy.”

CalPERS’ real estate assets rose 29.1% to $35.8 billion, while private equity was up 2.8% to $26.3 billion in the three years ended Sept. 30, P&I data show.

Investors would probably want to be in capital-appreciation strate-gies such as private equity and dis-tressed debt at the early part of the cycle, Mr. Meng said.

CalPERS’ distressed debt assets have dropped by 34.6% to $1.8 bil-lion in the three years ended Sept. 30. n

That active risk is expressed in ranges around the target allocation,

reflecting how much the portfolio can vary from the target allocation. As implemented as of July 1, the only target range that changed from the prior strategic asset allocation was the liquidity portfolio, now 3% to -6%, Mr. Baggesen said.

“You also provide a risk tolerance attached to the utilization of leverage,” he explained.

Mr. Baggesen noted that CalPERS’ 1% liquidity portfolio has the ability to add leverage to the entire portfolio, which CalPERS calls borrowed liquidity.

CalPERS CIO Yu “Ben” Meng said at the same investment committee meeting that borrowed liquidity means that in a market drawdown, CalPERS staff will be able to borrow against assets to take advantage of the market dislocation.

Staff is trying to be disciplined in using active risk, Mr. Baggesen said.

“We’re only using active risk if we believe, or have a reasonable belief, that somehow that variation is going to result in a positive return,’’ Mr. Baggesen said.

For fiscal year 2019, that positive return didn’t happen, even with the use of active risk, Mr. Baggesen added.

“So one of Ben’s significant projects that we’re undertaking is really a review of the utilization of active risk in the plan with the intent to be very disciplined about the deployment of active risk only in areas where we have a great conviction that we’re going to have a positive outcome.”

— ARLEEN JACOBIUS

STUDYING: Eric Baggesen said board members also will look at active risk in the pension fund’s portfolio.


top 200 funds totaled $5.59 trillion, up 2.5% for the year and up 17.7% for the five years ended Sept. 30.

In contrast, aggregate assets in the DC plans of top 200 retirement funds increased by 4.6% to $2.58 trillion in the year ended Sept. 30 and by 44.4% over the prior five years.

The vast majority — 166 — of the 200 largest retirement funds in P&I’s universe experienced positive asset growth in the year ended Sept. 30, but only 22 saw assets rise at least 10% in the year.

The pace of growth slowed for both DB and DC plans in P&I’s top 200 universe compared to prior years.

As of Sept. 30, 2018, assets of the top 200 DB plans rose 4.4% com-pared to the previous year and were up 22.4% over the previous five years. Assets managed in top 200 DC plans increased 10.7% in the year ended Sept. 30, 2018, and 53.5% over the five-year period.

Lower aggregate growth rates among the largest U.S. retirement funds were largely performance-related, thanks to sharp market de-clines in fourth quarter 2018, when the S&P 500 index fell 13.5%, one of the worst declines since the finan-cial crisis, sources said.

$764.9 billion lossP&I estimated that the top 1,000

U.S. retirement plans experienced a collective performance-related loss of $764.9 billion in their DB and DC plans in the fourth quarter of 2018, which sources said affected asset levels overall in the year ended Sept. 30.

P&I’s choice of Sept. 30 for one-year data collection for retirement

fund assets provides a good exam-ple of period-dependent perfor-mance and its impact on asset growth, said Steven J. Foresti, chief investment officer at Wilshire Con-sulting Inc., Santa Monica, Calif.

“In the fourth quarter 2018, the big culprit was the market. There were large sell-offs in October and December, including on Christmas Eve. It was brutal,” Mr. Foresti said.

He stressed that “one bad quar-ter among four made a massive dif-ference in the performance of re-

tirement funds over this period. The losses dug a big hole for many funds. Even with great performance in 2019, plan sponsors still were working off the losses as of Sept. 30,” Mr. Foresti said.

Aside from fixed income, returns of major market indexes in the year ended Sept. 30 were lower than those produced the prior year.

The Russell 3000 index rose 2.92% for the year ended Sept. 30, significantly lower than the 17.57% return of the index the prior year. Over the same period, the S&P 500 index returned 4.25% compared to 17.9% the prior year. The MSCI

ACWI IMI ex-U.S. equity index was down 1.84% compared to a 1.79% increase a year earlier.

The Bloomberg Barclays U.S. Ag-gregate Bond index was up 10.3% for the 12 months ended Sept. 30 and was down 1.2% the prior year.

Largest plansThe ranking of the three largest

retirement funds remained un-changed based on combined DB and DC plan assets as of Sept. 30: � Federal Retirement Thrift In-

vestment Board, Washington, re-mained in the top position with DC plan asset growth of 3.8% to $601 billion.� California Public Employees’

Retirement System, Sacramento, held on to second place with asset growth of 2% to $384.4 billion, 99.5% of which is in the system’s DB plan.� California State Teachers’ Re-

tirement System, West Sacramento, experienced growth of 5.7% to $243.3 billion, 99.5% of which is in the system’s DB plan.

The three largest corporate re-tirement funds based on total DB and DC plan assets remained the same as in the prior year, but Chica-go-based The Boeing Co. displaced AT&T Inc., Dallas, to take the No. 1 spot: � Boeing’s assets rose 4.7% to

$129.5 billion, with 51% in the firm’s DC plans in the year ended Sept. 30. � AT&T’s retirement plan assets

were up 1.2% to $125.6 billion, with 54% in DC plans, securing the sec-ond-place ranking.� International Business Ma-

chines Corp., Armonk, N.Y., accrued asset growth of 2.4% to $105.7 bil-lion to remain the third-largest cor-poration plan, with 51% of assets in its DC plans.

Over the one-year period ended Sept. 30, the aggregate asset mix of the DB plans in the top 200 list did not change dramatically, except U.S.

stock was down 2.4 percentage points to 22.5%.

Defined contribution sponsors among the top 200 retirement plans saw a more dramatic decline of 3.4 percentage points in the aggregate allocation to U.S. equity to 39.6% in the as well as an increase of 2.2 percentage points to 23.5% for tar-get-date funds.

A deeper dive into P&I’s data based on actual aggregate-dollar allocations by the defined benefit plans in the top 200 over the one- and five-year periods unveiled movement out of equities into fixed income and continued movement into passive strategies from active approaches.

DB plans of the 200 largest re-tirement funds reduced their allo-cation to actively managed U.S. eq-uity by 19.7% to $325.1 billion in the year ended Sept. 30, a drop of 22.8% over the five-year period. Invest-ment in passively managed U.S. eq-uity strategies was up 2.7% in the year to $621.7 billion and increased 7.9% over five years.

“There is general dissatisfaction with equity as an asset class as in-vestors continue to worry about eq-uity risk in this late-market cycle. It’s not a new trend,” said Jeffrey MacLean, CEO of investment con-sultant Verus Advisory Inc. Mr. Ma-cLean is based in the firm’s El Se-gundo, Calif. office.

However, he added that “there is a fair amount of regret from plan sponsors who missed out on strong returns of the S&P 500 in 2019,” noting that the S&P 500 returned about 31% in the calendar year.

During the year ended Sept. 30, several large retirement funds moved significant capital to passive equity strategies from active ap-proaches.

The New Jersey Division of In-vestment, Trenton, which manages the $78.5 billion New Jersey Pen-

sion Fund, eliminated its $24.1 bil-lion actively managed U.S. equity portfolio and moved $22.8 billion to passively managed domestic stocks.

Fund officials also decreased the fund’s actively managed interna-tional equity allocation by 25.8% to $2.6 billion and increased the allo-cation to passive international eq-uity by 9% to $11.4 billion.

Performance-relatedThe rationale for the shift was

performance-related, according to the 2019 annual report of the New Jersey State Investment Council, which oversees management of the pension fund.

Deepak D. Raj, chairman of the council, said in the report that the 6.3% performance in the fiscal year ended June 30 trailed the 7.1% re-turn of the fund’s benchmark pri-marily because the fund’s domestic equity portfolio underperformed the S&P 1500 benchmark.

“In the current market, it is diffi-cult to generate market-beating re-turns on large pools of capital. The division recognized this and moved decisively to a passive ... portfolio for domestic equities. The move to-ward a passive portfolio was essen-tially completed in September 2019. Not only does this make it less like-ly that we will miss market oppor-tunities, it also frees up division re-sources to be applied to other asset classes,” Mr. Raj said.

By comparison, assets in actively managed U.S. bonds by top 200 DB plans increased 6.2% to $802.9 bil-lion in the year ended Sept. 30, up 26.3% from five years ago.

Aggregate assets invested in passively managed U.S. bonds by large U.S. DB plans still are low compared to actively managed bonds. As of Sept. 30, the top 200 DB plans had an aggregate $138 billion invested using passive strategies, up 5.6% compared to the prior year

FundsCONTINUED FROM PAGE 1

THIN LINE: Jeffrey MacLean said equity risk worries investors, but some also regret not participating in 2019’s run-up.

Corporate DB plans of the larg-est 200 plan sponsors saw their al-locations to domestic fixed income grow to 47.4% of their portfolio as of Sept. 30, up from 43.4% the year prior, P&I’s survey found. Global/international fixed income made up 1.7% of these corporate DB plan’s portfolio, up from 1.5% as of Sept. 30, 2018. In comparison, domestic fixed-income allocations accounted for 38.8% of these corporate DB plans’ overall portfolio as of Sept. 30, 2017.

Altering approachOn the public DB side, invest-

ment consultant Callan LLC, San Francisco, has also seen a lot of plan sponsors reconsider how they approach their fixed-income port-folio, said Jay V. Kloepfer, an execu-tive vice president and the director of capital markets research at the firm.

“We saw (plans) pulling back on high yield, and maybe going from 15% to 20%” of their overall portfolio in fixed income in an attempt to re-duce risk, Mr. Kloepfer added.

“I think no one expected bonds to be up 10% last year,” he said.

The Bloomberg Barclays U.S. Ag-gregate bond index return for the year ended Sept. 30 was 10.3%, while the Bloomberg Barclays Global Aggregate Bond index (hedged) was up 10.7% for the year.

Over the year, defined benefit plans have also shown interest in private credit as it is “certainly less risky than pure equity,” but also “a diversifier that might be a nice re-turn source in an uneven market,” Mr. Kloepfer said.

He did note, however, that in a downturn, private credit “will suffer just like any other growth-oriented strategy.”

On average, public DB plans of the largest 200 plan sponsors allo-cated 21.1% of their total portfolio to domestic fixed income as of Sept. 30, up from 20.8% the previous year. Meanwhile, 2.6% was allocated to global/international fixed income, up from 2.1% the prior year, P&I’s survey found.

Looking forward, Mr. Kloepfer expects allocations to private credit to continue to increase among de-fined benefit plans, he added.

The $41.4 billion Arizona State Retirement System, Phoenix, re-ported the most DB assets in pri-vate credit at $8.1 billion as of Sept. 30, up 68.2% from the prior year.

Paul Matson, executive director at ASRS, said in an email that the retirement system “has had a strong conviction for several years that certain private credit markets offer an outsized risk-return profile, due to a generally segmented market caused by domestic and interna-tional regulatory changes and capi-tal market frictions.”

“With respect to the specific in-vestment characteristics, we find that focused management of this asset class can result in limited in-

terest rate risk due to the floating rate nature of most of the loans; limited credit duration and quicker return of capital due to the short-term nature of the loans; and strong repayment expectations due to the conservative underwriting stan-dards,” Mr. Matson added.

The $24 billion Illinois State Board of Investment, Chicago, more than doubled its DB plan assets in private credit to $633 million from $298 million the year earlier.

Additionally, the $36.7 billion In-diana Public Retirement System, Indianapolis, also noticeably in-creased its defined benefit assets in private credit by 307% to $289 mil-lion over the year ended Sept. 30.

As for DB plan interest in emerg-ing market debt strategies, John McClain, a fixed-income portfolio manager at Diamond Hill Capital Management Inc., in Columbus, Ohio, said increased assets are “part of this reach for yield” among pen-sion plans.

“EM debt looked optically cheap in 2019,” Mr. McClain said of bond valuations.

He expects there will be contin-ued demand for both private credit and emerging market debt among DB plans, as these asset classes “of-fer a yield pickup when compared to traditional fixed income.”

In this year’s survey of the larg-est U.S. retirement plan sponsors, the $384.4 billion California Public Employees’ Retirement System, Sacramento, had, by far, the highest amount of DB assets in emerging market debt as of Sept. 30, at $14.9

billion, up from $2.1 billion the year earlier.

Among the U.S. DB plans of the largest 200 plan sponsors, LDI as-sets noticeably increased by 16.7% over the year ended Sept. 30, and sources expect this trend to contin-ue as more DB plans increase their funded status and derisk.

Tax law incentiveFor corporate DB plans doing

LDI, in particular, the “big leg up was after the tax law changed be-cause there was an incentive for corporations to put in an extra con-tribution and get a bigger tax de-duction, and it increased the fund-ed status for plans,” Mr. Kloepfer said.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, signed into law by President Donald Trump on Dec. 22, 2017, reduced the corporate tax rate to 21% from 35%, which spurred many corpora-tions to take action in 2018 and ac-celerate pension contributions, P&I reported in a March 19, 2018, arti-cle.

He expects increased allocations to LDI to continue as “the chance that they are going to go back and rerisk is pretty small,” Mr. Kloepfer said of corporate DB plans.

Kevin McLaughlin, New York-based head of liability risk manage-ment at asset manager Insight In-vestment, said the largest corporate DB plans have a “finite funding tar-get they need to achieve.”

Additionally, “because of the strong rally in the (equity and bond) markets over the past 12 months,

you’ve seen an increase in their funded status — and it is triggering a lot of funds into another stage in their (LDI) glidepath,” Mr. McLaughlin said.

United Parcel Service Inc., At-lanta, again reported the most DB assets in LDI at $19.8 billion as of Sept. 30, up 27.3% from the year prior for its $47 billion DB plan.

United Technologies Corp., Farmington, Conn., reported the second-highest amount of LDI strategy assets, with $16.9 billion of its $30.8 billion DB plan in LDI as of Sept. 30, up 33.3% from the year be-fore. Additionally, Honeywell Inter-national Inc., Charlotte, N.C., saw its LDI assets grow to $9.2 billion in assets, up 3.4% over the year. Hon-eywell has $20.5 billion in DB as-sets.

The DB plans of the largest 200 plan sponsors also saw assets rise year-over-year across most other fixed-income strategies, including global/international bonds, domes-tic fixed income and bank loans, the year’s survey found.

The exceptions were assets in inflation-protected securities, which dropped 15.7% to $63.7 bil-lion over the year ended Sept. 30, and assets in high-yield strategies, which were down slightly by 1.4% at $68.9 billion as of the end of third quarter.

Not worried about inflationRegarding the decline in infla-

tion-protected assets, Mr. McLaugh-lin said there is “generally less con-cern about inflation,” and bigger

Fixed incomeCONTINUED FROM PAGE 3


but down 0.7% from five years ago.Wilshire’s Mr. Foresti said he

suspects corporations moving more assets into liability-driven invest-ments were the source of much of the strong growth in fixed income by defined benefit plans.

Assets identified as being in LDI strategies were up 16.7% to $109.8 billion for the year ended Sept. 30 and up 19.1% over five years.

Factor-based growthFactor-based equity strategies

also saw strong year-over-year growth of 159.4% for a total of $99.6 billion, Mr. Foresti noted. P&I did not track factor-based equity strat-egies, also called smart beta, five years ago.

“Investment in smart-beta strat-egies really is part of the move by asset owners to passive manage-ment from traditional actively man-aged approaches. Many smart-beta strategies essentially are passively managed and offer similar lower fees and tracking error,” Mr. Foresti said.

CalPERS accounted for the vast majority of growth in factor-based equity strategies, with a 280.2% in-crease to $72.4 billion.

Another area of growth within the universe of the 200 largest U.S. retirement funds was internal man-agement, with assets rising 9.4% to a total of $1.42 trillion in the year ended Sept. 30, an increase of 40.2% over five years.

CalPERS retained the first-place position with $286.4 billion of inter-nally managed DB plan assets as of Sept. 30, up 17.1% from the prior year.

CalSTRS moved to second with internally managed DB plan assets up 10.4% to $114.7 billion, replacing the $215.4 billion New York State Common Retirement Fund, Albany, which dropped to third place with a 1% decrease to $110.9 billion. n

desire for increased yield among DB plans.

Mr. McClain at Diamond Hill Capital Management said the small decline in high-yield assets could have been the result of some insti-tutions shifting assets in those strategies to private credit.

“Historically, you’ve received higher compensation from private credit than high yield. The more important aspect from an investor perspective is there’s a lack of mark-to-market volatility (in pri-vate credit) as you are not pricing these securities on a daily basis,” resulting in less volatility compared to high yield, Mr. McClain said.

The survey also found that assets in actively managed global/interna-tional fixed income, which includes emerging markets debt, grew 9.5% over the year ended Sept. 30, reach-ing $81.6 billion for the defined benefit plans of the largest 200 plan sponsors. Passively managed glob-al/international fixed-income as-sets grew 15.6% to $7.4 billion.

Meanwhile, assets in active, pas-sive and enhanced domestic fixed income all grew among this group of DB plans by 6.2%, 5.6% and 18.1%, respectively, the survey found. As-sets in active domestic fixed income reached $802.9 billion, while there was $138 billion in passive domestic bonds and $35.3 billion in enhanced domestic bonds as of Sept. 30.

Across the DB plans of the larg-est 200 plan sponsors, assets in bank loans grew 24.8% year-over-year to $13.1 billion, the survey found. n

thresholds for submitting share-holder proposals.

By the time the comment period ended Feb. 3, the proposals were on track to set a record for SEC com-ment letters, with more than 14,000 already posted on the agency's website, with investor groups, asset managers, pension funds, faith-based groups, scholars, state and lo-cal government officials, unions and thousands of individual inves-tors strongly opposing the propos-als.

If the new rules for proxy advi-sory firms are finalized, they would have to disclose more information about their processes and any con-flicts of interest and give companies the opportunity to offer revisions to their proxy reports.

Changes detailedChanges under the proposed

new rules for the shareholder pro-posal process include raising both the amount and time a stock is held before shareholders could file reso-lutions, higher thresholds for re-submitting shareholder proposals in subsequent years and timeouts for ideas that slip in support in a given year, among other things.

The question now turns to whether SEC officials are open to some compromises over practices that both sides acknowledge may have room for improvement, in-cluding giving companies a limited opportunity to fact-check for inac-curacies but not change things they simply don’t agree with.

There may not even be time, with the clock ticking to finalize the fast-moving initiative no later than May, to avoid having it undone if the White House changes hands in

2020. If the proposals are un-changed, it could be a return to the not-so-good old days, said Amy Borrus, deputy director of the Council of Institutional Investors in Washington, whose members in-clude 135 public pension funds, corporate and labor funds, and foundations and endowments with more than $4 trillion in combined assets.

“The business lob-bying campaign is aimed at making it harder and more costly for institution-al investors to get the independent re-search and advice they need to hold ex-ecutives accountable — and make it less likely they vote against management or vote at all,” partic-ularly on sensitive subjects like execu-tive pay, she said.

“I think corporate fury at proxy adviso-ry firms is fueled in part by nostalgia for the days when more equity was held di-rectly by individuals, and both retail and institutional investors generally voted automatically with manage-ment — or didn’t vote at all.

“Say-on-pay votes supercharged that ire. CEOs do not like public challenges to how and how much they are paid, or to be second-guessed by shareholders on a range of environmental, social and gover-nance matters,” Ms. Borrus said.

In its comment letter, hedge fund firm Third Point LLC said the tim-ing “does not seem to us like coinci-dence, as shareholders are de-manding increased transparency from public companies.”

The growing trend of ESG share-holder proposals is a frequent theme raised by many commenters, both for and against the changes. Corporate supporters of the chang-es caution that proxy advisory firms should only consider ESG motions with a direct tie to financial perfor-mance, and the same for sharehold-er proposals.

If finalized, the proposed rules “would introduce major impediments to environmental, so-cial and governance integration, which has traditionally de-pended on dedicated investors engaging with management and access to inde-pendent and efficient proxy voting advice,” Fiona Reynolds, CEO of Principles for Re-sponsible Invest-ment, wrote in a let-ter to the SEC. The letter was signed by scores of diverse in-vestors from around the world, including religious groups, foundations, public pension funds and

asset managers. The U.S. is the PRI’s largest mar-

ket, with more than 500 signatories investing more than $42 trillion in assets under management.

It is also a fiduciary issue, said William J. Stromberg, CEO and president of T. Rowe Price Group Inc. in Baltimore, in his comment letter. The proposed proxy reforms would likely give corporate issuers “considerably more time to review proxy reports than the fee-paying clients of proxy advisers” that rely on the reports to fulfill their fidu-ciary obligations to clients, he said.

The SEC’s own investor advisory committee reflects how polarizing the issues have become. A divided committee voted 10-5 to ask the SEC to rework the two proposals, saying that they do not serve inves-tor interests and that the SEC did not establish a link between the ac-tions and clearly identified prob-lems. Two dissenting members filed their own comment letter, saying there is room for the full commis-sion to debate the best path forward, one that should focus on proxy vot-ing advice that can increase share-holder value, and, at a minimum, the SEC should address conflicts of in-terest in proxy advisory firms.

First stepSEC Commissioner Elad Rois-

man, the point person for the pro-posals, characterized them in No-vember as a first step to get actionable feedback that will help agency officials achieve “a sensible modernization” of rules to help the SEC fulfill several missions: inves-tor protection, maintaining fair and efficient markets, and facilitating capital formation.

The prospect of something less than sensible in investors’ eyes is already triggering talk of delay or blocking tactics, including lawsuits challenging the SEC’s regulatory process and even freedom of speech protection for proxy firms.

“Shareholders are not going to stand for it. If the SEC does not go back to the drawing board, there will be legal challenges,” said Bran-don Rees, deputy director of corpo-rations and capital markets at the AFL-CIO in Washington. Its 55 member unions have a collective $736 billion in multiemployer pen-sion fund assets.

“The corporate community is hoping to turn back the clock, but that train has long left the station,” Mr. Rees said. n

ProposalsCONTINUED FROM PAGE 1

‘The corporate community is hoping to turn back the clock, but that train has long left the station.’AFL-CIO’S BRANDON REES

holistic and more integrated ap-proach to health insurance and re-tirement,” Mr. Sullivan said. “We’re making a significant move into the retirement space because our em-ployers are asking for it.”

The acquisitions bring together some of the largest re-tirement adviser firms in the country, giving OneDigital the retire-ment expertise it is looking to offer clients.

In addition to Re-sources Investment Advisors, an Overland Park, Kan.-based firm that supports indepen-dent financial advisers focused on corporate retirement plans, One-Digital bought 10 bene-fits and retirement ad-visory firms — Bukaty Companies Financial Services, 401k Advisors Intermountain, Cafaro Greenleaf, Capstone Advisory Group LLC, Chepenik, SHA Retire-ment Group, Strategic Retirement Group Inc., Teros Advisors, i2i Ben-efits and Insurance Services LLC — and the remaining retirement business of Lincoln Insurance Ser-vices, which it initially acquired in 2017.

It also bought the San Diego-based adviser practice of Fulcrum Partners LLC and three California-

based adviser practices of Retire-ment Benefits Group.

Industry convergenceTo industry observers, the multi-

ple acquisitions represent what they broadly define as the “conver-gence of health and wealth.” The chief financial officers and leaders of human resources departments at organizations across the country are more aligned about how to help

their employees achieve financial well-ness and retire with dignity, said Dick Dari-an, the Charleston, S.C.-based CEO of M&A consulting firm Wise Rhino Group, which advised OneDig-ital and Resources In-vestment Advisors in the transaction.

“The plan sponsor is beginning to look at those things a lot more holistically,” he said, re-ferring to employee

benefits and retirement plans. “Companies like OneDigital that have capability providing benefits, retirement and wealth will be able to approach those plan sponsors in a much more effective and holistic way.”

Indeed, health insurance and re-tirement plan benefits have evolved in distinct silos, industry experts are quick to note.

“They’ve grown up as completely separate verticals not because that’s what employers wanted but more

because it’s the way the two indus-tries grew up,” Mr. Sullivan said.

By combining health and wealth benefits under one umbrella, both OneDigital and the retirement ad-viser firms win complementary ca-pabilities, according to industry ob-servers. OneDigital gains a foothold in the retirement arena while ad-visers gain expertise in employee benefits and health insurance.

“I look at it as very complemen-tary,” said Dennis Gallant, a Boston-based senior analyst at research and consulting firm Aite Group. “It allows them to have a more unified front at looking at the benefits for any corporation that they’re dealing with.”

An integrated approach is espe-cially helpful in the area of health savings accounts, he said, as deci-sions around HSAs are typically made by benefits groups without input from the people running the retirement plans. Collapsing the services would help decision-mak-ers better determine which health plans and respective HSAs to bring in, giving advisers a chance to weigh in on HSAs, he said. Devenir research shows that more than $13 billion of the $61.7 billion in health savings accounts as of June 2019 was held in investment accounts, which observers say creates a po-tential new service offering for ad-visers.

Latest acquisition spreeOneDigital is the latest insurance

broker to move aggressively into the retirement plan advisory mar-

ket. Hub International Ltd. last year, for example, acquired 10 firms, in-cluding Global Retirement Part-ners, a $40 billion registered invest-ment adviser through which many of the firms Hub acquired cleared their transactions. The company has been acquiring adviser firms since 2017. Other insurance bro-kers have been snapping up advis-er shops for much longer, including National Financial Partners Corp., which began acquiring firms in the early to mid-2000s, and Arthur J. Gallagher & Co., which began doing so well before that, according to Wise Rhino’s Mr. Darian

OneDigital distinguishes itself from rival brokers buying retire-ment adviser firms in that it focuses only on health and employee-relat-ed benefits and not on property and casualty insurance, he said.

“That’s what makes them a little unique,” Mr. Darian said, explaining that property and casualty is a “dis-tant cousin to benefits” and has nothing to do with employees.

Now that OneDigital has estab-lished a beachhead in the retire-ment plan market, it plans to move aggressively to acquire more firms that fit with the company’s brand in terms of culture, values and vision, Mr. Sullivan said. He declined to say how many firms the company is looking to buy this year. “We think there’s a tremendous op-portunity to continue to scale this business,” he said. “It’s the single most strategic thing we have going on at the company right now. And we’re 100% in.” n

AdviserCONTINUED FROM PAGE 2

ALL GOOD: Dennis Gallant described the acquisition as ‘very complementary.’

Documents

The P&I 1000...Assets of the 1,000 largest U.S. retire-ment funds increased to $11.32 trillion in the year ended Sept. 30 at a slower pace — 2.9% — than in 2018 when assets grew