Letters to the Editor
-
Flaws in 'monkey business' study
RE: “Monkey Business. Here's another way to build equity indexes,” Frontlines, April 15.
-
Disclosure of processing errors of plans not enough
Surprisingly, in the settlement with ING announced in your Feb. 4 article, “ING pays $5.7 million in settlement over trading policy disclosure,” by Hazel Bradford, the Department of Labor regarded profits from 401(k) service provider processing errors as additional compensation which ING had a duty
-
S&P promotes ratings transparency
While Standard & Poor's agrees that investors should consider a variety of factors, including their own analysis, and not make decisions solely based on credit ratings (“Credit-rating downgrade,” Feb. 18), we strongly disagree with the suggestion that S&P's ratings are or were influenced by ...
-
Divesting and still meeting fiduciary duty
In your Jan. 21 editorial, “Misdirected Furor,” criticizing the so-called rush to firearms divestment on the part of institutional investors, I found it curious that the two institutions cited as bucking the trend about private equity — the University of Notre Dame and the General Board of Pension
-
Some hopeful development in long/short attribution analysis
I found Alexandre Voitenok and Rui Tang's Portfolio Management article (“Why long/short attribution is difficult,” Nov. 26) quite interesting. I agree with their suggestion that attribution for a long/short portfolio is more complex than against a long-only portfolio. However, there is hope to ...
-
Full audits of plans add substantial costs
You are quite correct when you say mandating standard audits in place of limited-scope audits of certain retirement plans will add to plan sponsor costs (“Time to expand audits,” Editorial, Jan. 7). You are quite wrong when you say these are “necessary” costs.
-
DC plan initiative presents a visionary pooled approach
I would like to point to a typo in your editorial titled “No need for new DC plan” in the Nov. 26 issue of Pensions & Investments. The word “No” was inadvertently added to the header I am sure you intended it to read: “Need for new DC plan.” Your editorial makes clear why P&I should be supporting
-
More transparency would benefit public plans
In his Jan. 21 “Other Views” commentary, “Misinformation adds to public plan woes,” Keith Brainard accuses us of either “negligence or fraud.” Why?
-
Nothing more irresponsible than investing in weapons
Re: “Misdirected furor,” editorial Jan. 21: As an accredited investment fiduciary, let me just say shame on you, editorial board, for suggesting that somehow one can be a legitimate fiduciary for investing in companies and industries even when the risks of doing so are so obvious and plentiful that
-
Fiduciaries best served by RFP search process
The Nov. 26 special report article, “A shift toward streamlining,” was very ably answered by Christopher Tobe (Letters to the Editor, “RFPs needed to prevent corruption,” Dec. 10). I'd like to add the larger issue of fiduciary responsibility to this discussion.
-
In attribution, you can't benchmark shorts
The article “Why long/short attribution is difficult” (Nov. 26, Portfolio Management) asserts that long-short attribution is virtually impossible because of the vagaries of short investing.
-
To prevent corruption, count on principled people, not RFPs
In response to the Dec. 10 letter to the editor, “RFPs needed to prevent corruption,” which addressed a Nov. 26 article, “A shift toward streamlining: Firms providing more manager information as public plans move away from traditional RFPs”
-
Low 5.5% rate fitted to underlying promises
Regarding Pensions & Investments' Dec. 10 “At Deadline” news item, “Return assumption to 5.5%” in reference to the Pennsylvania Municipal Retirement System:
-
RFPs needed to prevent corruption
The Nov. 26 Pensions & Investments page 15 article, “A shift toward streamlining: Firms providing more manager information as public plans move away from traditional RFPs.” forgets that public pensions need to be run for the benefit of taxpayers and beneficiaries, not for the convenience and/or ...
-
Ranking DRA's real estate assets
In Pensions & Investments' Oct. 15 real estate special report, DRA Advisors was not included in your listing of the largest real estate value-added managers. With $2.77 billion in value-added assets, we should have placed fifth on your list.
