Benchmarks stop us thinking: AXA IMBY BEN COLLINS | TUESDAY, 31 JUL 2012 11:45AMThe shock of the GFC, the impacts of the Euro crisis and moribund world capital markets ever since are forcing institutional investors to confront the reality that their traditional investments models aren't working, said AXA Investment Managers. |
Editor's Choice
REI Super chief executive steps down
|REI Super is farewelling its chief executive Jarrod Coysh, after more than seven years in the role.
Former Brighter Super investment lead plots return
|After a six-month hiatus, former Brighter Super chief investment officer Mark Rider is returning to the superannuation industry, set to join another super fund next month.
CGT, negative gearing changes to become a law
|The government's tax agenda announced in the Budget overhauling the capital gains tax (CGT) discount and negative gearing have now passed the Parliament and will become law.
BUSSQ beefs up cyber security oversight
|The Queensland industry fund has welcomed a cyber security expert to its board of trustees, bolstering its oversight on heightened cyber security risk.
Products
Featured Profile

Judith Fiander
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AUSTRALIAN PHILANTHROPIC SERVICES
AUSTRALIAN PHILANTHROPIC SERVICES
When Judith Fiander first walked in the doors of Australian Philanthropic Services her intention was to volunteer for a few months. Fast forward 14 years and she is the chief executive. Eliza Bavin writes.







Often one of the products of smart-beta portfolios is the creation of blended benchmarks. There are some pretty substantial operational costs and risks associated with this new approach to benchmarking using blends and customised hedges. The choice of benchmark architecture should definitely not be an afterthought. Picture an example combining FSTE ASEAN EX-Singapore Hedged into SGD 50% blended with FSTE Singapore in SGD 50% assuming daily modelling? The issues dictated by who designs the rules of the blend, the calculation methodology, whether the creation of the new benchmark levels are calculated in-house or by a specialist provider, the availability of a license to calculate blended outcomes and general governance of business justification can all drive complexity, inefficiency and leave a difficult to foresee "event" risk. Now imagine scaling implementation and opps up to cope with systemic blending of benchmarks for trade management, compliance, risk and performance attribution in-house - one of the popular choices. However you measure the likelihood of an unfavourable event occurring regarding the blending, the impact of errors in a calculation may include paying out multi-year penalty fees and substantial reputational damage. RIMES recommends spending some time considering risk management and a review of externally available solutions to support blends and benchmark customisations.