Skip to main content

CAPTRUST Q3 2013 Institutional Strategic Research Report

Page 1

PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

Strategic research report Longevity and the Future of Retirement John D. Curry Senior Director, CAPTRUST Marketing

A quick googling of the term longevity — meaning long life — yields some interesting results. One article spotlights residents of the Greek island of Ikaria, one of the so-called “blue zones”— small areas around the world where residents frequently outlive their life expectancy by more than a decade.1 Another highlights Texas centenarian Pearl Cantrell, who swears by her daily dose of bacon as a contributor to her long life. “It’s got to be crispy,” she told a recent interviewer.2 A third features genius inventor and entrepreneur Ray Kurzweil, who plans to live forever with the help of 150 pills a day and a supercomputer backup of his brain.3 As interesting — and quirky — as these stories are, seeing them merely as curiosities may cause us to ignore evidence that increased longevity is already underway and that we may enjoy surprisingly long lives. In fact, life expectancy in developed countries like the U.S. has been — and is expected to continue — rising at a rate of 2.5 years per decade: 3 months per year, 6 hours per day.4

In This Issue Letter from the Editor

2

Plan Sponsor Highlights

6

Investment Strategy

11

Index Returns

15

Investment Asset Classes

16

CAPTRUST News

19

Scientists, medical technologists, and statisticians are clear that increased longevity has already broadly taken root. Life expectancy in developed countries increased by three decades over the course of the 20th century alone. Children born in 1900, 1950, and 2000 in the U.S. were expected to see 47.3, 68.2, and 77.0 years of age, respectively.5 Today, without any further improvement in longevity, three-quarters of newborns will mark their 75th birthdays. More than half of babies born today in rich nations will live for 100 years.6 However, this is not simply a story about better health care for children; much of this increase in longevity is the result of a decline in mortality after age 80, which means that older people are living and staying healthy longer.7 Better elder health care has lengthened lives by allowing earlier diagnoses and better treatment of illnesses such as heart disease, cancer, and diabetes. Public health campaigns against smoking have also aided longevity.8 If you take it as a given that advances in medicine and technology are conspiring to give us longer lives, your likely (and legitimate) next question is: So what? While it is impossible to address the implications of an issue as far-reaching as longevity within this Strategic Research Report, we will attempt to provide a few broad strokes for thinking about longevity’s impact on retirement. continued on page 3


LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

LIVE LONG, AND PROSPER Dear Readers, Andy Rooney once said, “It is paradoxical that the idea of living a long life appeals to everyone, but the idea of getting old doesn’t appeal to anyone.” I agree with my fellow Colgate alumnus Mr. Rooney; aging isn’t very appealing. Tendonitis on both sides of my elbow, a temperamental lower back, and the fact that my 13-year-old daughter now gives me a stroke a round can weigh on a guy. But, as you will see in this quarter’s Strategic Research Report, we need to collectively prepare to live longer, thanks to advances that could sustain lives well past prior norms. Industry veteran John Curry sets the tone with a piece on longevity and our institutional subject matter experts Scott Matheson, Grant Verhaeghe, and Nick Paleocrassas follow with an exploration on how this phenomenon will impact plan sponsors, and what this means for you from a defined contribution, defined benefit, and nonqualified plan perspective, respectively. Washington developments take up some shelf space in this issue, as Scott Matheson recaps an exclusive opportunity we had to represent our clients on Capitol Hill. I provide some insight into the U.S. Federal Reserve, an institution just down the street from the Capitol, which we continue to view as the most significant near-term market driver. We appreciate your feedback and questions, and don’t forget to stretch; you’re likely to be around awhile, which is a very good thing indeed. Onward,

Eric J. Freedman CAPTRUST Chief Investment Officer

2

WWW.CAPTRUSTADVISORS.COM


PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

continued from page 1

Figure One: Number of Persons 65+, 1900–2030 80 72.1 70

60 54.8

40.3 40 35 31.2 30 25.5

20

16.6 9

10 3.1

Yet, even today, the idea of retirement is fading — for reasons both good and bad. Many Americans whose savings were adversely affected by market turmoil over the past decade are choosing to retire later.11 Meanwhile, others — facing the prospect of as many as 30 or 35 years of life postpaycheck — are rethinking the nature of retirement itself. Regardless of the cause, if we do, in fact, live longer and

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

50 (in millions)

One result of increasing longevity is a distinctly older America. The U.S. Census Bureau reports there are more Americans age 65 and older than at any time in U.S. history. Its 2010 report indicated there were 40.3 million people age 65 and older in 2010, up from 35 million in 2000 and just 3.1 million in 1900.9 That amounts to more than 13 percent of the U.S. population or more than one in eight Americans. Looking ahead, this number is projected to increase to 54.8 million in 2020 and 72.1 million by 2030 — representing more than 19 percent of the U.S. population of retirement age.10

4.9

0 1900

1920

1940

1960

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

Year

stay active well into our 80s and 90s, it begs the question of how we will spend our time. The supply and demand for labor are central to this debate. As a demographic cohort, the baby boom generation (the 81 million Americans born between the

years of 1945 and 1964) represents 38 percent of today’s working population with almost 60 million participating in the workforce.12 As the boomers begin to retire in the near term — the youngest is approximately 50 years old — employers may be hardpressed to find suitable replacements.

continued on page 4

3


continued from page 3

As this imbalance plays out, employers will need to reengineer their work arrangements to entice their older and more experienced workers to remain engaged in the workforce. Several broad possibilities exist:

Figure Two: United States Total Labor Force Participation by Generation, 2010

5%

Mature/WWII Generation (age 67+) 25%

Baby Boomers (age 47-66) 38%

Generation X (age 32-46) 32%

Generation Y/Millennials (age 12-31)

Work longer. Employers may actively encourage employees to continue career work on a full-time basis well beyond today’s average retirement age of 61.14 The prospect of staying active at work, while providing additional years of savings and accrual of Social Security benefits, may be appealing to many of retirement age. Some may consider this option for access to affordable health insurance alone. Flexible work arrangements. Fearful of losing their most experienced workers and knowledge base, employers may opt to allow part-time work for employees into their late 60s and early 70s.15 This phased retirement approach will allow these employees to continue working on a basis that helps them maintain social and economic connectivity to their workplace with enough free time to enjoy more traditional retirement pursuits.

4

WWW.CAPTRUSTADVISORS.COM

Competition for skilled workers will heat up as some employers provide flexible arrangements and embrace retirement-age employees, while others lag behind the trend. Employers may also have trouble retaining employees who are not ready to retire but want to try something different. Options for recareering are numerous and include everything from working at (or starting) a not-for-profit to incubating a new business to returning to school to build an entirely new set of skills and knowledge. The impact of our aging population on Social Security and Medicare, our so-called social safety net, is already front and center in the current U.S. budget debate. A vast number of Americans depend on these programs as their primary means of support in retirement. That number will grow significantly in the future, simply as a function of the number of Americans reaching the ages at which they are eligible to receive benefits. Pundits estimate the long-term deficits of Social Security and Medicare at $9.6 and $34 trillion, respectively, over the next 75 years — unless action is taken to improve their economics.16,17 Potential fixes for these programs include cutting benefits, means testing, upping eligibility ages, and increasing contribution rates. More than likely, the resolution will be some combination of all of the above. Any resolution will put increased pressure on individuals to take action to plan, save, and invest for their own retirements, either through employer-sponsored retirement plans, personal savings, or a combination of both.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics10

As Figure Two suggests, while boomers can be replaced by younger workers, generation X may not be sufficient in size — at “only” 49 million — to sate demand for experienced workers.13


PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

While it is hard to imagine not finding a solution for future generations, individuals or families would be wise to do the following: Plan to live a long time and save accordingly. Don’t rely on backward-looking benchmarks like average retirement age or life expectancy; these statistics are misleading and likely to result in under-saving. Plan for a retirement that could last 30 or 35 years — just to be on the safe side — and be sure to understand the amount of savings necessary to fund a potentially long retirement. Invest for the long haul. While many early- and near-retirees seek refuge from market volatility in a more conservative investment portfolio, they may inadvertently expose themselves to a different set of risks. Notably, they may expose themselves to the risk of running out of money (also known as shortfall risk) and the risk that inflation — especially healthcare inflation — erodes their purchasing power. The prospect of living a long, healthy, and happy life presents an exciting opportunity. While Pearl Cantrell may credit her long and productive life to her three-piecea-day bacon habit, for most it will not be that simple. Accumulating the resources necessary to wind down career employment at some point is a goal for most that will take thought, planning, and discipline to succeed. More than ever, individuals will be looking to their employers for retirement plans, education, and advice to help them address this important issue. Further, given longer lives for those of retirement age and the likelihood of Social Security and Medicare rollbacks in the future, employers may want to anticipate the implications of an older workforce — maybe one that incorporates a significant part-time population. We welcome the opportunity to speak with you more about longevity, and its impact on your retirement plan and plan participants.

Sources: 1

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/magazine/the-island-where-people-forget-to-die.html

2

http://www.today.com/food/its-got-be-crispy-woman-105-says-bacon-key-longevity1C9846050

3

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324504704578412581386515510.html

4

http://www.demogr.mpg.de/en/laboratories/survival_and_longevity_12/

5

http://www.census.gov/statab/hist/HS-16.pdf, “No. HS-16. Expectation of Life at Birth by Race and Sex: 1900 to 2001”

6

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aGCHVoAxPlu8

7

http://www.demogr.mpg.de/en/laboratories/survival_and_longevity_12/

8

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aGCHVoAxPlu8

9

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Administration on Aging, A Profile of Older Americans: 2011”, 2011

10

Ibid.

11

http://www.gallup.com/poll/162560/average-retirement-age.aspx

12

Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Household Data, Not Seasonally Adjusted: Table A-13: Employment Status of the Civilian Noninstitutional Population by Age, Sex, and Race”, 2012

13

Ibid.

14

http://www.gallup.com/poll/162560/average-retirement-age.aspx

15

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aGCHVoAxPlu8

16

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/social-security-faces-96t-unfunded-liabilities-83894household

17

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323393804578555461959256572.html

5


PLAN SPONSOR HIGHLIGHTS

CAPTRUST GOES TO WASHINGTON Scott Matheson, CFA, CPA Senior Director, CAPTRUST Consulting Research Group Defined Contribution Practice Leader

In mid-September, CAPTRUST Executive Committee member Rick Shoff and I traveled to Washington, D.C., to participate in the first-ever NAPA DC Fly-In. By way of background, the National Association of Plan Advisors (NAPA) is a relatively new organization of 6,700 members that started as a division of the American Society of Pension Professionals & Actuaries (ASPPA) back in 2011. NAPA’s mission is to “be a leader in the evolution of the national retirement system to improve transparency, effectiveness, and governance in an effort to improve the retirement outcome for participants.”1 The DC Fly-In was an invitation-only event with invitations extended to what NAPA termed “elite and influential 401(k) advisors,” and thanks to the trust plan sponsors like you have placed in CAPTRUST, we were honored to make this list. During our three-day stint in our nation’s capital,

6

WWW.CAPTRUSTADVISORS.COM

we participated in small group sessions with members of Congress and their staffs, professional lobbyists, and political pundits. We also spent time discussing many of the key issues affecting the retirement security of defined contribution plan participants in roundtable sessions with other leading advisors from around the country. Linus Van Pelt of Charles Schulz’ comic strip Peanuts fame said, “There are three things I have learned never to discuss with people…religion, politics, and the Great Pumpkin.” Sage advice from one of my favorite childhood holiday cartoon specials that still rings true today! While I am mindful of discussing politics at work, it is important to highlight a few of the key NAPA lobbying agenda items. The issues outlined below are reflective of the points of view that those in attendance at the DC Fly-In collectively shared with Congress members and their staffs during our trip.


PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

1. Saving at work works

2. A deferral is not a deduction

As Congress continues its debate over the federal debt limits and fiscal policy, leaders throughout the retirement industry are concerned that legislative efforts to raise revenue may negatively impact Americans’ ability to save for retirement. Specifically, any actions to reduce contributions or deductions or actions that remove incentives to offer defined contribution plans would be deleterious to working Americans’ ability to save for retirement.

When the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) computes and projects the federal budget, it only forecasts the next 10 years. This 10-year focus means that long-tailed, tax-deferred vehicles like the 401(k)s, 403(b)s, and IRAs look like tax deductions or expenditures (i.e., tax revenue forever lost) to the federal government. As we in the industry know, the government will eventually get its tax revenue when distributions begin, but that will likely happen well beyond the next 10 years for most of today’s workers saving for retirement.

Data from the Employee Benefit Research Institute shows that more than 70 percent of workers earning between $30,000 and $50,000 participated in employer-sponsored plans when a plan was available, whereas less than 5 percent of those without an employer plan contributed to an individual retirement account (IRA).2 Any legislative changes that deter savings will likely negatively affect the future retirement security of workers.

This mischaracterization of retirement vehicles causes policy makers to view tax-deferred savings as deductions. As a result, they get lumped into policy discussions with the other two largest deductions — mortgage interest and charitable contributions — both of which are permanent. The retirement industry’s lobbying efforts are not about arguing the

merits of retirement savings over home ownership or charitable giving; instead, they are focused on educating legislators on the difference between a deferral and a deduction. Unfortunately, the CBO’s continued use of a 10-year budget window challenges these efforts’ efficacy and puts the retirement industry at risk of legislation with shortsighted goals and long-term negative consequences. While in D.C., we shared several other discussions with policymakers, but the two above are very reflective of our interest in preserving working Americans’ opportunities to save for retirement. From CAPTRUST’s perspective, our views on these topics are apolitical and grounded in ensuring the retirement security of the more than 2 million participants we work with through our plan sponsor clients. We were honored by the opportunity to represent our clients at this selective forum and welcome any questions you may have emerging from our trip to Washington.

Sources: 1

http://www.napa-net.org/about-us/

2

Employee Benefit Research Institute (2010) estimate using 2008 Panel of the Survey of Income and Program Participation (covered by an Employer Plan) and EBRI estimate (not covered by an Employer Plan-IRA only)

7


RECALIBRATING RETIREMENT READINESS ANTICIPATING THE IMPACT OF LONGEVITY

As the trend of increasing longevity plays out over the coming years and decades, it will have an impact on the retirement plan landscape. But how it plays out will depend on the type of retirement plan that sponsors offer their participants. Defined contribution, defined benefit, and nonqualified plans will each be affected in different ways. In the sections that follow, CAPTRUST subject matter experts Scott Matheson, Grant Verhaeghe, and Nick Paleocrassas outline the potential impacts for the lines of business they represent.

Defined Contribution Plans Scott Matheson, CFA, CPA Senior Director, CAPTRUST Consulting Research Group Defined Contribution Practice Leader

Earlier this year, drivers across America’s highways—from the 405 in Los Angeles to New York City’s West Side Highway—began noticing some thought-provoking billboards popping up from Prudential, the insurance company. One that stuck with me read, “The first (person) to live to age 150 is alive today.” Given

8

WWW.CAPTRUSTADVISORS.COM

my role at CAPTRUST, the tagline “Let’s get ready for a longer retirement” obviously grabbed my attention. I acknowledge that life insurance and annuity companies stand to profit from engaging Americans in planning for an 85-year retirement, and I certainly approach all advertisements with a healthy dose of skepticism. But longevity is top of mind for the retirement industry and, as such, around the halls of CAPTRUST. My colleague John Curry’s article in this quarter’s Strategic Research Report highlights a number of the social and public policy issues associated with a society where life expectancy increases year after year, as well as the accompanying impact on the retirement industry. Evaluating the issues through the lens of a defined contribution plan participant, the defined benefit retirement plans of yesteryear are increasingly less common in the private sector, placing a greater onus on the participant to save and invest. Further, the increasing popularity of defined contribution plan design transfers the risk of participants outliving their money squarely onto the participant at a time when people are living longer. Longevity trends impact the retirement industry in a number of meaningful ways. With growing life expectancies, we could see the normal retirement age

creep higher than the commonly used age 65 threshold. The conventional game plan for migrating participant portfolios away from equities and toward fixed income assets followed within target date funds, managed accounts, and participant advice offerings will need to evolve as people live and potentially work longer. If people live in retirement for longer periods of time than the duration of their working careers, the challenges to defined contribution plans are immense—from savings to investing, to “decumulating” those savings sustainably. Defined Benefit Plans Grant Verhaeghe Senior Director, CAPTRUST Consulting Research Group Defined Benefit Practice Leader

Contrary to most topics regarding pension plans, the impact of longevity trends is a bit more straightforward. In 2012, the Society of Actuaries (SOA) issued a study exploring the impact of increased life expectancy—also referred to as mortality improvement—on pension liabilities.1 When actuaries extrapolate the value of an employer’s future promises in today’s dollars they have to make assumptions about participant life expectancy. As life expectancy has increased, the time horizon that pension plans will have to pay benefits to participants has also increased, which ultimately increases


PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

pension liabilities. The SOA study indicates that current mortality tables underestimate life expectancy and ultimately pension liabilities by a margin of 2 to 4 percent.2 Regulation will ultimately force adoption of more effective mortality tables and plan-specific demographics will determine the magnitude of the impact. It is interesting to note that younger, active female workforces will experience the largest mortality gain.3 Longevity implications based on plan sponsor liability settlement decisions will vary. Insurance companies are far better at estimating the true costs of mortality improvement, and thus include a markup as part of single premium group annuity prices as plans terminate. Additionally, the timing of a lump sum payout window will impact cost. Choosing to use a lump sum window under new mortality assumptions will result in a higher lump sum settlement amount than the current tables in a similar rate environment. For employers who choose to maintain plans or self-insure, there is a high probability that funding levels will decline when actuaries adopt the new mortality improvement scales. At a minimum, plan sponsors may be writing a check to participants for longer than assumed. The notion of an actuarial table assuming how long a given individual will live and collect benefits is a rather futile concept. While slightly more effective than visiting the average palm reader, mortality tables do not control the amount of bacon the average Pearl Cantrell eats (see cover story on longevity). With improvements in healthcare and wellness initiatives, employers should be actively planning for mortality improvement and the commensurate added expense. The practical answer is that employers will have to consider a multitude of factors when planning for longevity. These factors include a look at plan design as it relates to normal retirement age and workforce management, future contribution strategies, asset allocation strategies that may

have to work harder, and pension risk transfer strategies. Creative solutions such as longevity insurance can also be part of the mix. Regardless of how these factors impact your organization, careful planning for increased longevity will be an integral part of running a successful retirement program. Nonqualified Plans Nick Paleocrassas Senior Manager, Nonqualified Executive Benefits

Since nonqualified plans are designed for key executives, longevity impacts their lives in several ways, especially given low annual qualified plan deferral limits relative to their compensation. The potential accumulation versus spending “gap” resulting from a longer life and fewer ways to save for retirement needs will likely make nonqualified plans more popular for plan sponsors as a retention tool, particularly in cases where defined benefit plans are frozen or simply do not

continued on page 10

9


continued from page 9

exist. We continue to have discussions with plan sponsors about nonqualified plan features and benefits, and if we can help you assess their viability in your plan offerings, please let us know. For plan sponsors with an existing nonqualified plan or for those in the latter stages of starting one, longevity carries a more immediate need for attention, particularly for those plans financed with life insurance. Permanent life insurance is a popular choice when selecting a financing solution for a nonqualified deferred compensation plan. Using life insurance can offer attractive advantages compared to alternatives (see CAPTRUST Position Paper: A Three-Step Approach to Nonqualified Plan Financing for more details). One frequently emphasized advantage is the opportunity for cost recovery upon the payment of death claims. However, quantifying this advantage is difficult and dependent on the timing of death among the population of individuals insured. Human longevity assumptions have a significant impact on the present value projection of these death claims. A death claim of $1 million 30 years in the future has a significantly higher present value than the same death claim 50 years in the future. Death from natural causes might happen as early as age 70 or perhaps as late as 90, and this 20-year difference can be meaningful from a cost standpoint. Averages taken from mortality tables are more dependable when the pool of lives is extremely large but have less correlation when a small number of policies are issued. Another danger exists if the mortality assumptions taken into account are based on the life expectancy of a blue-collar population as opposed to an executive or white-collar population.

The simplest way to guard against these potential risks is to apply less weight to cost recovery when considering the use of life insurance. Additional advantages of using life insurance continue to include the potential for attractive annual corporate cash flow and positive impact to the income statement. Another way to address the issue of longevity, while still factoring in the cost recovery impact of life insurance, is to perform a sensitivity analysis and inflate the average age assumption beyond current mortality projections. This allows the company to gauge the economic significance of a group of insureds living longer than expected. Finally, when determining the number of policies to issue inside a portfolio, using a larger number of smaller policies will help reduce longevity risk by increasing the pool of insureds and protecting against outliers.

Living longer means a new set of considerations for plan sponsors across qualiďŹ ed and nonqualiďŹ ed plans. This phenomenon has implications across investment solutions, plan demographics, plan design, and communication strategies. These brief topical discussions by business line offer an introduction to a topic that you will be hearing about a lot from the industry, and we strive to be at the forefront of thought leadership resulting in better client outcomes within this important subject. „

Sources:

10

1

Exposure Draft, Report of the Society of Actuaries, Mortality Improvement Scale BB, March 2012

2

Ibid.

3

Ibid.

WWW.CAPTRUSTADVISORS.COM


PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

investment strategy

CREATIVE THINKING Eric J. Freedman CAPTRUST Chief Investment Officer

I could see the train wreck take shape in slow motion. My wife Jamie’s birthday is September 30, and as I opined in this column four years ago this very quarter, birthdays are a big deal at the Freedman house. While Jamie is not one for drawing attention on her birthday, she puts up with a lot given my hectic work schedule, so our three kids and I really focus on her day. Since I had to be at a client meeting two plane rides away the morning of her birthday, I flew out the Sunday before and was slated to return well after dinner on her actual birthday. Business travel before and during her birthday was the first part of the train wreck, and the potential for marketimpactful Washington shenanigans

was the second, which increased as the government’s fiscal year-end approached with no continuing resolution to avoid a full or partial government shutdown. Of course, the continuing resolution deadline fell on Jamie’s birthday. Given my lack of physical presence that Monday, I had to prepare well in advance and build in contingencies. I got some presents, secured a cake, and gathered the kids’ homemade birthday cards. Perhaps the variable I was most excited about was plotting how Conner, my 6-year-old son, would deliver fresh flowers to Jamie that Monday morning. Just before I left for the airport, I bought a bouquet and

hid them in a secret spot in his room, where the flowers would remain out of Jamie’s sight. Conner was to give them to Jamie when she woke him up for kindergarten the next morning. Should my flights get delayed or canceled, Jamie would at least have some items representative of our affection for her. Given the circumstances, our kids and I agreed that this was about as creative as we could get. In the vein of creativity amid uncertainty, global central banks, including the U.S. Federal Reserve, have been forced into some unconventional thinking about how to steady the broad economy, both during and since the global financial

continued on page 12

11


continued from page 11

retirement plans), and finally, using more conventional central bank tools to buy securities in the open market in an attempt to hold down borrowing costs.2 These tools were used at times in conjunction with other global central banks (particularly during the crisis’ height), in other periods independently, and at times to the chagrin of other central banks worried about how Fed policy may indirectly affect them.

We see central bank policy as the single largest market driver across asset classes, and we do not crisis. We see central bank policy as the single largest market driver across asset classes, and we do not see that abating for some time. Despite historians’ attempts to compare the crisis with past financial calamities like the Great Depression, the global economy is fundamentally very different now, due to globalization and vastly different industrial and political structures. Central bank leaders like the Fed’s Ben Bernanke and Europe’s Mario Draghi have drawn from past crises, but the playbook is very different today. Accordingly, our investment strategy needs to take into account which central bank policy choices may materialize and their resultant impact on asset classes. The Fed has three objectives when it enacts monetary policy, defined as actions that central banks take to achieve their economic goals (compared with fiscal policy, which refers to spending and tax policy set by the federal government): achieving maximum employment, fostering price stability, and moderating longer-term interest rates.1 These are lofty goals, and the financial crisis proved to be a stern test for the Fed and other market agents; prices plummeted, unemployment moved higher, and longer-term interest rates dropped by almost half from crisis onset to the proverbial eye of the storm. The Fed’s response was indeed creative, deploying three toolsets to offset economic morass: short-term loans for private banks and other central banks, injecting liquidity directly into credit markets (for example, money market funds within

12

WWW.CAPTRUSTADVISORS.COM

see that abating for some time.

Fed critics claim that Chairman Bernanke and colleagues have overstepped their monetary policy boundaries. Even Warren Buffett (famed investor and one-time lunch companion of yours truly) called the Fed “the greatest hedge fund in history” at a September event with students, highlighting the Fed’s largesse and ability to generate revenue for the U.S. government through its bond purchase programs.3 Whether one agrees with Mr. Buffett’s characterization or not, the Fed’s size cannot be disputed; through purchasing treasury and mortgage bonds, its balance sheet has increased from $869 billion in August 2007 to more than $3.7 trillion in October 2013.4 Many investors suggest the Fed has limited policy options remaining, considering the size and total time committed thus far, leading them to conclude that the Fed has a very small overall impact in markets today. We disagree, based on market evidence from the end of September. Heading into the Fed’s mid-September policy meeting, most everyone expected the Fed to announce a slowdown from its current $85 billion per month bond buying program given economic data as well as Fed posturing before this meeting and ensuing press conference. However, the Fed chose to continue bond buying at then-existing levels, resulting in the largest intraday price swing in the U.S. bond market in more than two years, based on CAPTRUST research. Markets would not have


PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

Figure One: U.S. Inflation Measures, January 2007–September 2013

600

2

500

1

400

0

Index

3

LEFT AXIS

300

-1

CRB Index 200

-2

Inflation Rate (in percent)

700

RIGHT AXIS PCE Year over Year 100

-3

U.S. 3-year Breakevens 0

-4 2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Year

reacted as sharply if the Fed did not carry market gravitas, thus solidifying our view that Fed policy still dominates asset class movements. The Fed is not alone in its creative thinking. The Bank of Japan has also radically altered its approach to monetary policy, and while its only focus is price stability, recent policy actions have jolted the Japanese economy and capital markets in an attempt to, in the Bank of Japan’s own words, “lead Japan’s economy to overcome the deflation that has lasted for nearly 15 years.”5 The European Central Bank (ECB) has also been forced to think in unconventional means; however, the ECB has been unable to wield as aggressive a posturing as Japan and the U.S. due to political differences across European countries about the correct pan-European response. Irrespective, ECB President Mario Draghi has successfully staved off bond market upheaval in challenged economies like Portugal, Spain, and Italy based on a now

infamous pledge to do “whatever it takes to preserve the euro. And believe me (Draghi), it will be enough.”6 Even the UK has gotten in on the unconventional thinking act, importing former Canadian central bank head Mark Carney as the new Bank of England governor. We see creative thought continuing to evolve, and our market views will be shaped by Fed and global central bank policy. As you can see in Figure One, the Fed faces a conundrum: a growing yet sluggish economy, jolted by trillions of stimulus dollars yet still not reflecting inflationary pressures normally expected after stimulus of such magnitude and duration. Figure One includes a reading from the CRB Index, which measures a broad basket of commodity prices, the Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE) Index, a favored Fed gauge of household products and service costs, and 3-year breakevens, which reveal forward inflation expectations vis-à-vis bond prices.

continued on page 14

13


continued from page 13

All three measures remain subdued due to economic growth indices reflecting an abnormal economic environment relative to expectations this far into a recovery. Given this outcome, the Fed and other central banks are unlikely to remove stimulus for a long time. We remain enthusiastic about global stocks, particularly those geared toward long-term secular

However, investors in traditional bond sectors like treasurys and mortgages should continue to expect lower returns than experienced in recent years. Our investment committee, utilizing work done by teammate Hunter Brackett, emphasizes that investors seeking greater portfolio returns must be prepared to accept higher levels of portfolio volatility found in riskier asset classes, thanks to low bond yields. Once the Fed begins to slow its bond market purchases and eventually stop, bond prices could face some challenges.

growth that take advantage of demographics largely unaffected by economic ebbs and flows as well as those with valuation support. So, what to do amid a capital market backdrop dominated by central banks? We believe having a variety of return sources in portfolios is the best path forward. We remain enthusiastic about global stocks, particularly those geared toward long-term secular growth that take advantage of demographics largely unaffected by economic ebbs and flows as well as those with valuation support. While interest rates are low by historical standards, political division could hurt riskier asset classes, making parts of the bond market attractive in the near term.

As for Jamie’s birthday, the flower plan worked like a charm. Conner woke up and got himself dressed for school before Jamie had a chance to wake him, and upon opening his door, there was her baby boy, holding a vase full of flowers with a proud smile on his face. I reminded Jamie of that image when I told her at about 9 pm (a full 90 minutes after I arrived home) that I had to watch C-SPAN for the rest of her birthday night as Congress could not compromise and avoid a partial government shutdown. She smiled and nodded nostalgically as she handed me my pillow. As creatively as I tried to position myself, sleeping on the downstairs couch was particularly uncomfortable that night.

Sources:

14

1

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_12848.htm

2

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_crisisresponse.htm

3

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-20/buffett-says-federal-reserve-is-greatest-hedge-fund-in-history.html

4

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_recenttrends.htm

5

Bank of Japan Statement on Monetary Policy, October 4, 2013, available at http://www.boj.or.jp/en/mopo/mpmdeci/state_2013/index.htm/

6

Mario Draghi speech to Global Investment Conference in London, July 26, 2012. Available at http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2012/html/sp120726.en.html

WWW.CAPTRUSTADVISORS.COM


PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

index returns

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Small Cap Value

Small Cap Value

Fixed Income

Small Cap Growth

Mid Cap Value

22.83%

14.02%

9.84%

48.54%

23.70%

14.02%

Mid Cap Value

Fixed Income

Cash

Small Cap Value

Small Cap Value

19.18%

8.96%

46.03%

Mid Cap Value

Fixed Income

Cash 3.64%

10.12%

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

YTD ’13

Large Cap Growth

Fixed Income

Mid Cap Growth

Small Cap Growth

Fixed Income

Mid Cap Value

Small Cap Growth

26.86%

11.81%

5.08%

46.29%

29.09%

7.84%

18.51%

32.47%

Mid Cap Value

Small Cap Value

International Equities

Cash

Large Cap Growth

Mid Cap Growth

Large Cap Growth

Small Cap Value

Mid Cap Growth

22.25%

12.65%

23.48%

11.63%

37.21%

26.38%

2.64%

18.05%

25.42%

Mid Cap Growth

International Equities

Mid Cap Growth

Large Cap Value

Mid Cap Growth

Small Cap Value

Small Cap Growth

Mid Cap Value

Large Cap Value

International Equities

Small Cap Value

-9.64%

42.71%

20.70%

12.10%

22.25%

11.43%

-28.92%

34.47%

24.75%

0.39%

17.90%

23.07%

Cash

Large Cap Value

Mid Cap Value

17.51%

22.94%

1.68%

2005

2006

International International Equities Equities

1.51%

Large Cap Value

Mid Cap Value

Small Cap Value

International Equities

Large Cap Value

Large Cap Value

Mid Cap Value

Fixed Income

Large Cap Value

Mid Cap Value

Small Cap Value

7.02%

2.33%

-11.42%

39.17%

16.49%

7.05%

20.22%

7.39%

-36.85%

34.21%

24.50%

Cash

Large Cap Value

Large Cap Value

Mid Cap Value

Mid Cap Growth

Large Cap Growth

Small Cap Growth

Small Cap Growth

Mid Cap Value

International Equities

Large Cap Growth

Mid Cap Value

Mid Cap Growth

Large Cap Growth

-5.59%

-15.52%

38.07%

15.48%

5.26%

13.35%

7.05%

-38.44%

32.46%

16.71%

-1.38%

15.81%

20.87%

Mid Cap Growth

Small Cap Growth

International Equities

Large Cap Value

Small Cap Growth

Small Cap Value

Mid Cap Growth

Cash

Large Cap Growth

Small Cap Value

Large Cap Value

Mid Cap Growth

Large Cap Growth

Large Cap Value

-11.75%

-9.23%

-15.66%

30.03%

14.31%

4.71%

10.66%

-38.44%

20.58%

15.51%

-1.65%

15.26%

20.47%

International Equities

Mid Cap Growth

Mid Cap Growth

Large Cap Growth

Large Cap Growth

Small Cap Growth

Large Cap Growth

Large Cap Value

Small Cap Growth

Large Cap Value

International Equities

Small Cap Growth

Small Cap Growth

International Equities

-13.96%

-20.15%

-27.41%

29.75%

6.30%

4.15%

9.07%

-0.17%

-38.54%

19.69%

8.21%

-2.91%

14.59%

16.59%

Large Cap Growth

Large Cap Growth

Large Cap Growth

Fixed Income

Fixed Income

Cash

Cash

Mid Cap Value

International Equities

Fixed Income

Fixed Income

Small Cap Value

Fixed Income

3.35%

5.08%

Fixed Income

Fixed Income

6.36%

-22.42%

-20.42%

-27.88%

Small Cap Growth

International Equities

Small Cap Growth

-22.43%

-21.21%

-30.26%

4.31%

3.04%

Cash

Cash

1.05%

1.44%

1.58%

4.71%

-1.42%

-43.06%

Small Cap Value

Mid Cap Growth

4.08%

-9.78%

5.89%

-5.50%

Cash

Cash

International Equities

0.21%

0.13%

5.24%

-44.32%

0.10%

4.22%

Cash 0.11%

-11.73%

Cash 0.06%

Fixed Income -1.89%

Small-Cap Value Stocks (Russell 2000 Value)

Large-Cap Value Stocks (Russell 1000 Value)

International Equities (MSCI)

Small-Cap Growth Stocks (Russell 2000 Growth)

Mid-Cap Growth Stocks (Russell Mid-Cap Growth Index)

Fixed Income (Barclays Capital U.S. Intermediate Govt/Credit)

Large-Cap Growth Stocks (Russell 1000 Growth)

Mid-Cap Value Stocks (Russell Mid-Cap Value Index)

Cash (Merrill Lynch 3-Month Treasury Bill)

Sources: Markov Processes Inc., Bloomberg, Mobius

2013 3RD QUARTER ASSET CLASS RETURNS

INDICES

Q3 ’13

YTD ’13

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

1-YEAR

3-YEAR

5-YEAR

10-YEAR

S&P 500

5.24%

19.79%

16.00%

2.11%

15.06%

26.46%

-37.00%

19.34%

16.27%

10.02%

7.57%

2.12%

17.64%

10.24%

8.38%

14.06%

22.68%

-31.93%

15.59%

14.94%

9.93%

7.74%

10.82%

24.90%

15.91%

-1.80%

16.91%

43.89%

-40.54%

21.03%

16.77%

12.51%

7.76%

6.02%

20.76%

16.42%

1.50%

16.10%

28.43%

-37.60%

20.91%

16.64%

10.53%

7.98%

8.11%

20.87%

15.26%

2.64%

16.71%

37.21%

-38.44%

19.27%

16.94%

12.07%

7.82%

3.94%

20.47%

17.51%

0.39%

15.51%

19.69%

-36.85%

22.30%

16.25%

8.86%

7.99%

Russell Mid-Cap Index

7.70%

24.34%

17.28%

-1.55%

25.48%

40.48%

-41.46%

27.91%

17.53%

12.97%

10.78%

Russell 2000

10.21%

27.69%

16.35%

-4.18%

26.85%

27.17%

-33.79%

30.06%

18.29%

11.15%

9.64%

Russell 2000 Growth

12.80%

32.47%

14.59%

-2.91%

29.09%

34.47%

-38.54%

33.07%

19.96%

13.17%

9.85%

7.59%

23.07%

18.05%

-5.50%

24.50%

20.58%

-28.92%

27.04%

16.57%

9.13%

9.29%

Dow Jones Industrial Average NASDAQ Composite Russell 1000 Russell 1000 Growth Russell 1000 Value

Russell 2000 Value

11.61%

16.59%

17.90%

-11.73%

8.21%

32.46%

-43.06%

24.29%

8.97%

6.85%

8.50%

Wilshire REIT Index

-3.04%

2.71%

17.59%

9.24%

28.60%

28.60%

-39.20%

5.26%

12.48%

5.55%

9.42%

Barclays Govt. Intermediate Bond

0.40%

-0.83%

1.73%

6.08%

4.98%

-0.32%

10.43%

-0.80%

1.75%

3.52%

3.76%

Barclays Corporate IG Bond

0.82%

-2.62%

9.82%

8.15%

9.00%

18.68%

-4.94%

-1.58%

4.40%

9.24%

5.27%

Barclays Aggregate Bond

0.57%

-1.89%

4.21%

7.84%

6.54%

5.93%

5.24%

-1.68%

2.86%

5.41%

4.59%

Barclays Intermediate Govt./Credit

0.62%

-0.84%

3.89%

5.80%

5.89%

5.24%

5.08%

-0.50%

2.41%

4.95%

4.10%

Barclays High Yield

2.28%

3.73%

15.81%

4.98%

15.12%

58.21%

-26.16%

7.14%

9.19%

13.53%

8.86%

90-Day U.S. Treasury

0.02%

0.06%

0.11%

0.10%

0.13%

0.21%

2.06%

0.10%

0.10%

0.17%

1.70%

Consumer Price Index (Inflation)

0.28%

1.99%

1.74%

2.96%

1.50%

2.72%

0.09%

1.19%

2.34%

1.37%

2.37%

MSCI Europe, Australia, Far East

Sources: Morningstar, Mobius, MPI

2013 3RD QUARTER INDEX PERFORMANCE

The information contained in this report is from sources believed to be reliable but are not warranted by CAPTRUST Financial Advisors to be accurate or complete. Index performance depicts historical performance and is not meant to predict future results.

15


investment asset classes

U.S. EQUITIES Market Performance, 3rd Quarter 2013

• U.S. stocks continued their ascent higher in the third quarter with the S&P 500 closing up 5.2% for the quarter 2013

Large Value (R1000 Value)

3.94%

20.47%

Large Blend (S&P 500)

5.24%

19.79%

8.11%

20.87%

Mid Value (Russell)

5.89%

22.94%

Mid Blend (Russell)

7.70%

24.34%

Mid Growth (Russell)

9.34%

25.42%

Small Value (R2000 Value)

7.59%

23.07%

Small Blend (R2000 Blend)

10.21%

27.69%

Small Growth (R2000 Growth)

12.80%

32.47%

Large Growth (R1000 Growth)

and 19.8% for the year. Mid- and small-caps were up 7.7% and 10.2%, respectively, for the quarter, bringing both of them up more than 24% for the year-to-date period. • Nine of 10 major S&P 500 sectors were positive in the third quarter, led by materials (+10.3%) and industrials (+8.9%). Telecoms were the sole sector in negative Source: MPI Stylus Pro

Q3 ’13

territory (-4.4%), and utilities were up a scant 0.2%. • Since the U.S. equity market touched its March 2009 low, large-caps, mid-caps, and small-caps are up 174%, 234%, and 233%, respectively, including reinvested dividends.

INTERNATIONAL EQUITIES Market Performance, 3rd Quarter 2013

• Developed and emerging international equities both rose in U.S. dollar terms in the third quarter, with the former 2013

11.61%

16.59%

Pacific Stocks (MSCI Pacific Ex-Japan)

10.36%

5.29%

European Stocks (MSCI Europe Ex-UK)

14.47%

19.01%

6.71%

24.47%

UK Stocks (MSCI UK)

12.05%

12.38%

Emerging Markets (MSCI EME)

5.90%

-4.05%

International Equities (MSCI EAFE)

Japanese Stocks (MSCI Japan)

up 16.6% and the latter down 4.1% for the year-to-date period. The developed equity-focused MSCI EAFE Index has been higher 14 out of the last 18 quarters, while the Source: MPI Stylus Pro

Q3 ’13

MSCI Emerging Markets Index has been higher 13 out of the last 18 quarters. • Japan continued to rally in the third quarter, despite a higher yen relative to the dollar. Japan has rallied 41% this year in local currency, but thanks to a sliding yen, it has gained 24.5% in dollars. • Emerging markets were mostly higher during the quarter with China +12.2% but flat year to date. Russia +13.7% but up just 1% for the year, while India fell 5.3% and is down close to 13% for 2013.

16

WWW.CAPTRUSTADVISORS.COM


PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

FIXED INCOME Market Performance, 3rd Quarter 2013

• The Barclays Aggregate Bond Index rose 0.60% in the third quarter after falling in the second quarter, putting a dent in 2013

Broad Market (Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate)

0.57%

-1.89%

Barclays Capital U.S. Treasurys

0.10%

-2.01%

Barclays Capital Mortgage Backed Securities

1.03%

-1.00%

-0.19%

-2.87%

1.10%

-0.74%

2.28%

3.73%

Barclays Capital Municipals Barclays Capital Intermediate Corporates Barclays Capital High Yield

the index’s 1.9% negative return thus far in 2013. Note that the index has not had a negative annual return in 13 years. Source: MPI Stylus Pro

Q3 ’13

• Historically riskier parts of the bond market were rewarded in the quarter, with high yield up 2.3% and emerging market increasing by 1.4%. Treasuries managed a positive 0.10% return but are still down 2% for the yearto-date period. • Research firm ICI’s mutual fund flow data indicated that after the U.S. Federal Reserve opted to resume its bond purchase program in late September, investors finally added to bond funds after two straight months of withdrawals.

HEDGE FUNDS / PRIVATE EQUITY Market Performance, 3rd Quarter 2013

• Hedge fund strategies posted a solid start to 2013, with the HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index posting a 5.6% return 2013

2.28%

5.58%

HFRI Equity Hedge Index

4.11%

9.18%

HFRI Relative Value Index

1.98%

5.04%

HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index

2.13%

5.56%

HFRI Fund of Funds Conservative Index

1.54%

5.20%

HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index

through the end of September, despite a difficult August. • Global macro remained a challenging strategy (-2.7% year to date) after losing 1% for 2012 and registering weak Source: HFRI

Q3 ’13

2010 and 2011 calendar years as global central bank policy and unstable trends continue to impact managers. Equity hedged strategies are up more than 6.6% for the year but have been unable to keep up with global equities after the latter’s strong third quarter performance. Event driven strategies, particularly special situations, are standouts thus far in 2013. • Research firm Prequin highlights that private equity fundraising was strong for the third quarter, particularly in North America, where firms have raised $195 million this year through September 30, just $3 million shy of what they raised for all of 2012.

continued on page 18

17


continued from page 17

COMMODITIES Market Performance, 3rd Quarter 2013 Q3 ’13

2013

2.13%

-8.56%

S&P GSCI Commodity Index

4.78%

-0.89%

Gold (Spot, $/oz)

8.81% -20.55%

Dow Jones UBS Commodity Index

Natural Gas (U.S. Spot Henry Hub)

-2.24%

1.93%

Crude Oil (U.S. Spot, WTI Cushing)

5.98%

11.45%

Sources: MPI Stylus Pro, Bloomberg

• The Dow Jones UBS Commodity Index rose 2.1% in the quarter after falling 9.5% in the second quarter, and despite a positive third quarter, commodities are down more than 8% for the year. Dollar strength has hurt so far this year, as has concern about Chinese demand. • At the subindex level crude and WTI oil were helped by Mideast tensions, and copper staged an impressive intraquarter rally but remains down more than 10% year to date. • Precious metals bounced in the July-September period following significant declines earlier in the year. Gold was up 8.8% and silver up 11.2%, but the two popular commodities have fallen along with investors’ feelings about future inflation; year to date, gold is down more than 20% and silver more than 28%.

Market Performance, 3rd Quarter 2013 Q3 ’13

2013

MSCI U.S. REIT Index

-3.00%

3.17%

Wilshire REIT Index

-3.04%

2.71%

Source: MPI Stylus Pro

REAL ESTATE • Public real estate, as measured by the MSCI U.S. REIT Index, fell 3% in the third quarter. REITs underperformed U.S. equities for the fifth quarter out of the last 10. REITs are still positive for the year (+3.2%) and are up a staggering 199.1% cumulative over the past 10 years ended December 31. • Valuation coupled with interest rate sensitivity are two drivers of shaky REIT returns in recent months, with the sharp move higher in bond yields from May through September weighing on the space. • Commercial mortgage bank security issuance, a gauge of property market deal volume, slowed in the third quarter after a robust start to 2013.

18

WWW.CAPTRUSTADVISORS.COM


PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

captrust news

CAPTRUST GROWTH CAPTRUST grew in the third quarter with the following new additions to the team. Raleigh, NC Office

Greenwich, CT Office

Craig Harris joined CAPTRUST as a relationship manager, financial advisor, and is responsible for providing retirement plan advisory services to corporate fiduciaries. Prior to joining the firm, Craig served as an associate partner with Aon Hewitt and has worked in the industry since 1990. Craig received a Bachelor of Science degree in business administration with a concentration in finance from Wake Forest University and holds the Certified Employee Benefit Specialist (CEBS) designation.

Ernest Liebré joined CAPTRUST as senior vice president, financial advisor. An industry veteran, Ernest has been providing retirement plan advisory services to corporate fiduciaries since 1967. Prior to joining the firm, Ernest served as founder and managing director of Cambridge Financial Services. Ernest received a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics from Iona College and a Master of Business Administration degree in finance from the University of Chicago.

Robert Eagle joined CAPTRUST as a relationship manager, financial advisor, and has worked in the industry since 1995. Robert is responsible for providing retirement plan advisory services and recently served as senior associate at Mercer. Robert received a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics from the University of North Carolina, Charlotte and holds the Accredited Investment Fiduciary (AIF®), Chartered Mutual Fund Counselor (CMFC), and Chartered Retirement Plans Specialist (CRPS) designations.

Bruce Graham joined CAPTRUST as vice president, financial advisor, and is responsible for providing retirement plan advisory services to corporate fiduciaries, as well as comprehensive wealth management services to high-net-worth investors, private foundations, corporate executives, and business owners. Prior to joining the firm, Bruce served as Senior Managing Director with Clearbrook Global and has worked in the industry since 1981. Bruce received a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics from Bucknell University, as well as a Master of Business Administration degree in finance from NYU Stern School of Business, and is a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA®).

Lourens Prinsloo joined CAPTRUST as director of application development and is responsible for managing all activities related to the design, development, and implementation of the firm’s applications and analysis function. Prior to joining the firm, Lourens served as assistant vice president, enterprise architect, at First Citizens Bank & Trust Company and has worked in the industry since 1988. He is a graduate of the University of Pretoria (South Africa) with a Bachelor of Science degree in computer science.

RECOGNITION CAPTRUST, for a second time, has been named one of 2013’s “Best Places to Work” by the Triangle Business Journal for excellence in team effectiveness, employee communications, employee engagement, and organizational leadership. CAPTRUST was among several companies in the Triangle area of Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill being honored this year. Winners were determined by Quantum Market Research, an outside research firm hired to conduct and tabulate the feedback from a confidential employee survey.

continued on page 20

19


PLAN SPONSOR | Q3 13

continued from page 19

GIVING BACK We are honored to have supported these charities during the third quarter of 2013. • A Child’s Place

Team CAPTRUST standing ready at the 2013 Walk for Hope starting line. Courtney McGuirk, Todd and Nicole Jones, Holly and Mark Vickstrom, Chad Day, Ellen Crowley, Mark and Sue Paccione, Abigail and Alton Russell. Not pictured: Allison and Wade Sisson and James and Rebecca Stenstrom

• Hayme Serrato’s Martial Arts

• UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center

• All 4 Youth

• Miracle League

• Webb Simpson Challenge Golf Tournament/Retreat

• Jimmy V Foundation

• BackPack Buddies (Inter-Faith Food Shuttle)

• HopeLine

• Great Trail Council Boy Scouts of America

• Council for Children’s Rights

• Children Guidance & Family Solutions

• Walk for Hope (Foundation of Hope)

• Raleigh Rescue Mission

• New Alternatives for Children

• Broughton Caps Club

• SAFEchild

• Boys and Girls Club of Wake County • Taylor Family Foundation

• Kelly Brush Foundation

INDUSTRY INVOLVEMENT September 9–11, 2013 | Orlando, FL PLANADVISER National Conference Team/Practice Building: How do 401(k) Adviser Teams Segment Roles and Responsibilities? Panelist: J. Fielding Miller, Co-founder and CEO Retirement Income: In and Out of Plan Solutions Moderator: John Pickett, Financial Advisor Asset Mix: Are Participants Better Off in a General AssetAllocated Fund like Target-Date Funds or Individualized Managed Accounts? Moderator: Phyllis Klein, Senior Director October 1, 2013 | Chapel Hill, NC North Carolina Investment Institute Conference Best Investment Ideas Speaker: Eric Freedman, Chief Investment Officer October 9, 2013 | Philadelphia, PA PennJerDel Employee Benefits Association (PEBA) The Two Sides of Deferred Compensation Speakers: Danny Lowe, Senior Vice President and Chris Kulick, Financial Advisor

October 17, 2013 | Webinar Mid-Sized Retirement & Healthcare Plan Management Conference Best Practices for Conducting an Advisor Request for Proposal (RFP) Speaker: Greg Middleton, Senior Manager October 22 and 23, 2013 | Clarkston, MI Enhancing Retirement Readiness through Outcomes-Based Plan Management Speakers: John Young, Financial Advisor and Casey Pogodzinski, Financial Advisor November 12, 2013 | Greensboro, NC Mid-Sized Retirement & Healthcare Plan Management Conference Leveraging Your 403(b) Plan Speakers: Jimmy Talton, Financial Advisor and Danny Summerlin, Financial Advisor November 18–19, 2013 | Dallas, TX The 19th Annual National Pension and Institutional Investor Summit Quantifying Success in a DC Plan Moderator: Travis Whitten, Financial Advisor

All publication rights reserved. None of the

The opinions expressed in this report are subject to change without notice. This material has

material in this publication may be reproduced

been prepared or is distributed solely for informational purposes and is not a solicitation

in any form without the express written

or an offer to buy any security or instrument or to participate in any trading strategy. The

permission of CAPTRUST: 919.870.6822.

information and statistics in this report are from sources believed to be reliable but are not warranted by CAPTRUST Financial Advisors to be accurate or complete. Performance

©2013 CAPTRUST Financial Advisors

data depicts historical performance and is not meant to predict future results. CAPTRUST Financial Advisors, Member FINRA/SIPC.

20

WWW.CAPTRUSTADVISORS.COM


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
CAPTRUST Q3 2013 Institutional Strategic Research Report by CAPTRUST - Issuu