• What We Do
    • Wealth Counseling
    • Investment Advisory Services
  • Who We Are
    • Our Team
    • Research Roundtable
  • How We Invest
    • Our Fiduciary Pledge
    • Investment Approach
    • Questions To Consider
    • Our Transparent Approach
  • Insights and Research

Insights and Research

Home  »  Investment Philosophy • Private Investing • Simplicity   »   Do You Need to Join the Endowment Club?

Do You Need to Join the Endowment Club?

By Preston McSwain, February 12, 2020

For many years, we’ve looked at how simple, globally diversified portfolios of index funds have performed versus the top endowments.

Even though the data has consistently said that individual investors could consistently produce top quartile returns by keeping it simple, we continue to see and hear messages like the following:

To be a good fiduciary of wealth, you need to “join the club” and “place 40% or more” of your assets into private investments and other types of alternative investment funds.

We think good work is being done inside top endowments and our comparisons are not meant to suggest that they change.

Endowments have different objectives, time horizons, cash flow needs, and tax profiles than individuals, and our comparisons are simply meant to offer an alternative to presentations suggesting that families “need to” invest in endowment style portfolios.

The Latest Results

First, the good news for endowment-style investment approaches.

For the first time, spanning the years 2000-2019, top quartile endowments seem to have outperformed a simple global mix of index funds over a 10-year period.

Below are the results.

The simple 60/40 global index fund portfolio illustrated below, which had outperformed 75% of all U.S. endowments 9 out of 9 times, for every single trailing 10-year period from 2000-2010 to 2008-2018, has dropped out of the top quartile for the 10-year period ending 2019 (8.8% vs. 9.1%).

60/40 Global Index Fund Only Portfolio

Relative Performance Over Multiple 10-Year Periods


Sources:  MPI Database and Stylus software, Morningstar mutual fund performance data collected by MPI, The National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO – see important disclosures and details at the bottom of this post).  Endowment returns and comparisons are for endowment June 30 fiscal year end reporting periods.

Our question after looking even closer at the data this year, however, is this:

Over this time period, has a simple 60/40 global index fund portfolio ever been an appropriate benchmark for the endowments that individuals are being encouraged to follow?

Consider This

For many years, large U.S. endowments and foundations have been reporting increased allocations to private equity and other types of investments, which have equity like risk and, hopefully, attractive equity-like returns.

As an example, below is a chart of rolling, asset weighted allocations of U.S. endowments and affiliated foundations since 2002 (as far back as the data allows), according to The National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO) Endowment Study.

Endowment Allocations Over Time


Source:  NACUBO Study of Endowments

As this chart illustrates, even though some endowments report performance as compared to 60% equity and 40% bond benchmarks, it doesn’t seem to have been a good proxy for quite some time.

For the majority of the last decade, and previous to the financial crisis, 70% equities and 30% bonds might have been a better comparison.

Assumptions are key in all of this and debate could be had about how much equity like risk and return potential exists inside top quartile endowments.

NACUBO has historically lumped alternatives together in various ways, although in 2019 their Endowment Study made things a bit easier by including a category called “Other Equities.”

This category included Private Equity, Venture Capital and other Marketable Alternatives.  Even though the word “Equities” was used, we assumed that not all alternatives are equity-like (80% was allocated to equities and 20% was allocated to bonds).

What’s the best proxy over all of these time periods for families to consider?

Heated banter will continue for sure.

But, based on the trend line of equities, and taking into account the red line marked above, which indicates 60% equities, and the green line, which highlights 70% equities, a higher allocation than 60% to stocks seems appropriate.

Assuming higher allocations to equities or equity like investments have been the case over these time periods, what happens to our comparisons when we move our index only allocations to 70% in global equities?

Ten out of Ten

The following 70% global equity and 30% bond index portfolio, re-balanced only once a year on January 1st (the methodology we have used in the past) has performed at the top quartile level – ten out of ten times – for every 10-year period spanning 2000-2019.

And for those who are wondering, a 65% global equity and 35% bond index portfolio also has ranked in the top quartile for each 10-year period.

70/30 Global Index Fund Only Portfolio

Relative Performance Over Multiple 10-Year Periods


Sources:  MPI Database and Stylus software, Morningstar mutual fund performance data collected by MPI, The National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO).

This all takes us back to the title of this piece:

Do Families Need Endowment Style Portfolios?

We say no.

Either way we’ve cut it, simple mixes of index funds, re-balanced in a simple fashion, have consistently outperformed more than 75% of the endowments families are being encouraged to follow.

As we mention at the start of this post, many endowments are doing a great job on behalf of their beneficiaries.

This piece is not meant to suggest otherwise.

In addition, we aren’t proposing that all families solely invest in index funds or that all endowment-style private and alternative investments aren’t appropriate. Some are.

As long as endowment style portfolios continue to be promoted as a “need-to-do, not a nice-to-do,” however, we’ll keep citing these keys to Unconventional Success.

“Only extraordinary circumstances justify deviation from a simple strategy…”

And

“When you look at the results on an after-fee, after-tax basis, over reasonably long periods of time, there’s almost no chance that you end up beating an index fund. The odds are 100 to 1.”

– David Swensen, Chief Investment Officer, Yale Endowment


 

Related Reading:

Are Selectors Good At Selecting? – Elisabetta Basilico, Phd, CFA

Don’t Put Yourself in a Corner – Joachim Klement, CFA

Are We Baking Portfolios with Bad Ingredients? – Tommi Johnsen, PhD

The Triumph of Hope Over Experience? – Oliver Binette, CAIA

Are Alternative Funds Prudent for Taxable Investors? – Preston McSwain – Trust & Estates

The Failure of the Endowment Model? – Richard Ennis – Journal of Portfolio Management

NACUBO Endowment Rankings – The National Association of College and University Business Officers

 


Special Thank You

A big thank you goes to Brian Portnoy, Phd, CFA, for his good counsel and edits on this piece.

Additional credit goes to members of our Research Roundtable for their important contributions and feedback.


 

Important Disclosures:

Return Data Sources: NACUBO-Commonfund Study of Endowments and Foundations (NCSE), Morningstar and MPI Software

Past performance does not guarantee or indicate future results.

60/40 and 70/30 Global Index Only Portfolio (GIOP) returns are based on the historical results of actual Vanguard index funds, but represent hypothetical returns. GIOP returns could be lower if outside investment advisory fees were applied and, depending on how the funds were implemented and re-balanced, actual client returns might differ. Future returns may be higher or lower.

GIOP returns assume reinvestment of all distributions at NAV & deduction of fund expenses. 10-year returns are annualized.

This complete document is for informational purposes only and it should not be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy the securities or other instruments mentioned in it.

Preston McSwain
+ postsBio
  • Preston McSwain
    Better Ways to Invest in Bonds?
  • Preston McSwain
    The Difference Simple Alternatives Can Make – 15 for 15
  • Preston McSwain
    Emerging Markets – Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze?
  • Preston McSwain
    The Road Less Traveled – Simple Alternatives
  • Preston McSwain
    Beware of Sharpe Objects
  • Preston McSwain
    The Certain Drag on Performance – Taxes
  • Preston McSwain
    Will the Real Alphas Stand Up?
  • Preston McSwain
    Is Top Manager Performance A Random Walk?
  • Preston McSwain
    Questioning the Illiquidity Premium
  • Preston McSwain
    Staying Disciplined and Avoiding Unforced Errors
  • Preston McSwain
    Still Keeping A Steady Hand
  • Preston McSwain
    Smaller Is Better
  • Preston McSwain
    Recessions – What Should Investors Do?
  • Preston McSwain
    What To Do About Inversions
  • Preston McSwain
    The Normal Steady Hand
  • Preston McSwain
    Solutions to Increase Trust – Simple But No Simpler
  • Preston McSwain
    Perspectives of a Trillion Dollar Investor – Our Conversation with Richard Ennis
  • Preston McSwain
    Trillions – Our Talk With Robin Wigglesworth About Index Funds
  • Preston McSwain
    Should We Be Tactical?
  • Preston McSwain
    It’s All Greek to Me
  • Preston McSwain
    The Same Thing – Over and Over
  • Preston McSwain
    Stats About Statistics
  • Preston McSwain
    Inflation – What Should An Investor Do?
  • Preston McSwain
    Waving Banners – Have Some ESG Managers Lost Their Way?
  • Preston McSwain
    Do The Kingmakers Have Clothes?
  • Preston McSwain
    Private Investment Questions and Issues to Consider
  • Preston McSwain
    Is Smart Beta Smart?
  • Preston McSwain
    The Simple Alternative
  • Preston McSwain
    Don’t Get Sacked – Super Bowl Version LV
  • Preston McSwain
    How to Actively Add Value
  • Preston McSwain
    What Needs to Change?
  • Preston McSwain
    Don’t Put Yourself in a Corner
  • Preston McSwain
    Trillions of Influence
  • Preston McSwain
    What Should Investors Do?
  • Preston McSwain
    Don’t Get Sacked – Super Bowl Version LIV
  • Preston McSwain
    Relative Alpha®
  • Preston McSwain
    Bungled Benchmarking
  • Preston McSwain
    Do Index Funds Make Active Funds Better?
  • Preston McSwain
    The Triumph of Hope Over Experience?
  • Preston McSwain
    Fallible Forecasts?
  • Preston McSwain
    Cash Flow – Nothing More
  • Preston McSwain
    Every Year Can Not Be Good
  • Preston McSwain
    Are We Baking Portfolios with Bad Ingredients?
  • Preston McSwain
    Private Equity Access: Do We Need More or Should We Beware?
  • Preston McSwain
    21 Tips On How To Evaluate An Investment Adviser
  • Preston McSwain
    Outperformance in Down Markets 100% of the Time?
  • Preston McSwain
    Holiday Colors
  • Preston McSwain
    Private Persistence That Just Ain’t So?
  • Preston McSwain
    The Good Lehman Brothers Story
  • Preston McSwain
    Who Is Passive?
  • Preston McSwain
    What Is Active?
  • Preston McSwain
    Why We Don’t Make Forecasts
  • Preston McSwain
    The Normal
  • Preston McSwain
    You Can Keep It Simple
  • Preston McSwain
    Where Are Fees and Expenses Not Costs?
  • Preston McSwain
    Private Presentations: Are Some Tall Tales?
  • Preston McSwain
    How Trustees Can Be Prudently Passive
  • Preston McSwain
    Ignoring Fees Doesn’t Beat the Market
  • Preston McSwain
    Trust and Fiduciary Services: Questions to Consider
  • Preston McSwain
    How to Do Better When Investing for Trusts and UHNW Individuals?
  • Preston McSwain
    How Should You Invest Now?
  • Preston McSwain
    What Should Investors Do Now About…. ?
  • Preston McSwain
    Why Do Warren’s Words Carry Weight?
  • Preston McSwain
    Can I Do Better?
  • Preston McSwain
    Chicken Fried & Cold Beer On A Friday Night
  • Preston McSwain
    Don’t Let Your Portfolio Get Sacked
  • Preston McSwain
    Our Daily Groundhog Day?
  • Preston McSwain
    Talking Heads
  • Preston McSwain
    Your Brain On The Market
  • Preston McSwain
    Absolute Value and Transparency
  • Preston McSwain
    What’s In A Name?
  • Preston McSwain
    Are Hedge Funds Prudent for Taxable Investors?
  • Preston McSwain
    Keep A Steady Hand On The Tiller
  • Preston McSwain
    Pavlov’s Brokers?
  • Preston McSwain
    Is Bad For Business Sometimes Good?
  • Preston McSwain
    Say It Ain’t So, Joe
  • Preston McSwain
    Rock Science
  • Preston McSwain
    Don’t Be A Sheep
  • Preston McSwain
    No Crystal Balls – Just Peace Of Mind
  • Preston McSwain
    What Would Yale Do If It Was Taxable?
  • Preston McSwain
    Say It Ain’t So, Joe
  • Preston McSwain
    Is Trying to Pick Active Managers a Loser’s Game?
  • Preston McSwain
    If We Had A Chief Economist We Would Have to Pay Them
  • Preston McSwain
    Fiduciary Wealth Partners Reading List
  • Preston McSwain
    Transparency, Simplicity and Peace of Mind®
SHARE
Tags:
Endowments, Index funds, Private Equity
RELATED ARTICLES
The Difference Simple Alternatives Can Make – 15 for 15
Simple portfolios consistently outperform the complex.
The Road Less Traveled – Simple Alternatives
A different type of edge – a simple investment alternative.
Are Most Investment Managers One Hit Wonders?
As someone who is about to continue my studies in the hopes of having a rewarding job in Finance, the data is unsettling.
All articles

Follow us on social media

Search Our Ideas

Subscribe to Our Posts


Important disclosures

Most Popular

  • Questioning the Illiquidity Premium
  • Say It Ain’t So, Joe
  • The Simple Alternative
  • Crucial Elements in Wealth Management: Simplicity and Transparency
  • Are We Baking Portfolios with Bad Ingredients?

Browse by Theme

  • Fees
  • Fiduciary Duty
  • Investment Philosophy
  • Managing The Market
  • Peace of Mind
  • Performance Measurement
  • Private Investing
  • Quarterly Letter
  • Simplicity
  • Taxes
  • Transparency
  • Uncategorized
  • Values

FWP Logo Dark

Fiduciary Wealth Partners is a 100% employee owned firm that serves clients in a transparent, fiduciary manner.

We do not have any fee sharing arrangements with managers and do not have any broker-dealer conflicts. In addition, you will never see an arbitration clause in our contracts.

Everything we do is focused on assisting trustees, institutions and families with investment consulting, management and overall asset planning strategies.

  • Disclosures
  • ADV
  • Privacy Policy
  • Form CRS

Useful Links

  • Investment Advisory Services
  • Wealth Counseling
  • Our Team
  • Research Roundtable
  • Our Values
  • Questions To Consider
  • Insights and Ideas
  • Contact Us

Contact us

Phone

(617) 602-1900

Email

info@fwpwealth.com

Address

2310 Washington Street
3rd Floor
Newton, MA 02462

 

View larger map

© 2020 FWP. All Rights Reserved. Fiduciary Wealth Partners Is An SEC Registered Investment Adviser.