Finance and Economics；Canada's pension funds
财经；加拿大的养老基金；
Canada's public pension funds are changing the deal-making landscape;
加拿大养老基金变更投资布局；
They own assets all over the world, including property in Manhattan, utilities in Chile, international airports and the high-speed railway connecting London to the Channel tunnel. They have taken part in six of the top 100 leveraged buy-outs in history. They have won the attention both of Wall Street firms, which consider them rivals, and institutional investors, which aspire to be like them.
他们所拥有的财产遍布全球，这包括在曼哈顿的房产，智利的公共设施，国际机场以及将伦敦与外界连通的高铁海底隧道。历史上最有影响的100宗负债收购他们就占了6宗.无论是华尔街的竞争对手还是渴望像他们一样的公共机构的投资者，都对他们青睐有加。
These giants are Canada's largest public pension-fund groups. They manage around C640 billion dollar(643 billion dollar) between them. Of the 40 largest public pension funds in the world, four are Canadian, according to Preqin, a research firm (see table). America aside, no other country has more on the list. But size is not what marks them out. Their approach to investment is intriguing.
这些巨头就是加拿大最大的几家公共养老基金集团。他们管理着大约6400亿加元（约合6430亿美元）。据一家名为Preqin的研究机构的调查表明，在全球最大的40家公共养老基金中，加拿大就占了4家。除了美国之外，没有其它哪个国家有如此之多的机构榜上有名。但引人注目的不是他们的规模,而是他们的投资手法。
Unlike those in charge of public pension funds elsewhere, the Canadians prefer to run their portfolios internally and invest directly. They put more of their money into buy-outs, infrastructure and property, believing that these produce higher returns than publicly traded stocks and bonds. They are in some ways like depoliticised sovereign-wealth funds. Jim Leech, the boss of Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan, calls them a “new brand of financial institution”. And as public pensions around the world cope with painfully low yields on their assets, many see them as a template. Michael Bloomberg, New York City's mayor, is among the model's admirers.
和其它掌管公共养老基金的机构不同的是，加拿大人更喜欢在内部经营他们的投资组合以及直接投资。他们把资金大量投在并购，基础设施和房地产领域。因为他们坚信这些领域方面的投资回报大于公共股票与债券方面的投资回报。他们有点类似于去政治化的主权财富基金。安大略省教师养老金计划负责人Jim Leech把它称为“金融机构的新品牌”。世界上其它为之收益甚少而头疼的养老基金把加拿大养老基金视为榜样。纽约市长Michael Bloomberg正是这种模式的推崇者之一。
Ontario Teachers pioneered this style of investing in the 1990s when it brought more of its investments in-house. Other large funds soon followed suit, building up teams to handle deals on their own. The Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System (OMERS) wants to have 90% of its assets managed internally by the end of 2012,leaving some room for allocations to external managers in specific areas.
安大略教师养老基金于上世纪九十年代开创了这种投资模式，那时它便开始采用多元化的内部化投资方式了。其它大的投资基金很快纷纷效仿，并建立起自己的团队来管理。到2012年底，安大略省市政雇员退休体系计划把90%的资产用于内部经营，仅留少部分供外聘经理人投资到其它地方。
The funds will do smaller deals alone but often act as “co-sponsors” with leading private-equity firms on bigger transactions. This allows them to have more control over the investment and to save on fees. CPP Investment Board and PSP Investments, for example, worked with Apax, a buy-out firm, to acquire Kinetic Concepts, an American medical-devices company, for 6.1 billion dollar. It was one of the biggest buy-out deals in 2011.
基金会将会单独处理小笔交易，但更多的时候它是扮演着“共同赞助者”的角色，与大的私募股权公司一起处理大宗交易。这使得基金会能更好地控制投资并节省交易费用。例如CPP投资委员会和PSP投资，和一家名叫Apax的并购公司合作，以61亿美元的价格收购了美国的Kinetic Concepts医疗器械公司。这是2011年大宗并购交易之一。
The main draw of the Canadian model is cost savings. Running operations directly helps plug “the incredible leakage that goes out through fees” to pricey external managers, says Gordon Fyfe, the boss of PSP Investments, a large fund. In private equity, for example, many managers charge a fee equal to 2% of assets and 20% of profits. Hiring staff and building up internal capabilities costs far less. Keith Ambachtsheer of KPA Advisory Services, a pensions consultancy, says running assets internally costs a tenth of what it would if they were outsourced.
加拿大模式最引人注目的地方是成本低廉。一家名为PSP的大型投资基金的老板Gordon Fyfe指出，直接管理业务能够节省本该支付给外聘经理的高昂费用。例如，对私募股权来说，多数经理人的佣金相当于资产的2%和利润的20%。雇用员工和打造内部能力的成本远远低于经理人的费用。KPA咨询公司的养老金顾问Keith Ambachtsheer认为，与外购相比，资产的内部化运营成本仅为外购成本的十分之一.
There are other advantages. Public pension funds have a longer investment horizon than private-equity firms, so the Canadian behemoths can choose to sell when the time is right, mitigating some of the risks of investing in illiquid assets. In December, for example, Ontario Teachers announced it would sell its majority stake in Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment, a large Canadian sports business, for around C1.3 billion dollar. They had been invested in Maple Leaf since 1994, far longer than a private-equity firm's typical five-year horizon, and are expected to get a return of five times their money.
此外其它的有利因素是公共养老基金的投资期限和范围比私募股权公司大得多，因此加拿大这个庞大的公共养老基金集团可以在时机合适时将其出售，从而减小投资非现金资产的风险。例如，在十二月安大略省教师养老基金就宣布出售其在加拿大最大的体育产业之一的枫叶体育和娱乐的大部分股份，约13亿加元。这个养老基金自从1994年起就一直投资枫叶体育，远比私募股权通常五年的投资期限长得多。而且预期可得到初始投资五倍的回报。
Because they are saving so much on fees and only need to meet the liabilities of scheme-members' pensions, moreover, the Canadian funds feel less pressure to chase the high returns that leading buy-out firms do. They can pursue investments with less risk and leverage. “Because returns don't have to be as good, they can bid more for companies,” says one buy-out boss. It sounds like a loser's lament.
因为节省了大笔费用，而且仅须满足支付养老金计划所覆盖的人群，此外，加拿大养老基金不像并购公司那样面临追求高额回报的压力。他们能够通过低风险和杠杆作用来经营投资。“因为收益不必太高，所以他们比其它公司更有竞争力”，一位并购公司的老板如此评价。这听起来就像是失败者的悲鸣。
So far the funds' strategy has paid off. Over the past ten years Ontario Teachers has had the highest total returns of the biggest 330 public and private pension funds in the world. Some of this outperformance stems from the relative strength of Canadian stockmarkets and property, to which Canadian pension funds have higher allocations than others. But not all of it. In 2010 OMERS returned 25 dollar on every dollar spent on internal management, for instance, compared to only 10 dollar for every dollar spent on external managers' fees.
迄今为止，养老基金的战略已初见成效。在过去的十多年时间里，安大略省教师养老基金在全球330家最大的公共及私人养老金中它的收益回报是最高的。这个骄人业绩部分是得益于加拿大股票及房地产市场的繁荣，这使得加拿大养老基金在房地产方面的投资高于在其它行业的投资。但这不是全部原因。例如，2010年安大略省市政雇员退休体系在内部管理上的花费中，每一美元得到25美元的回报。相比之下，在外聘经理的花销中，每一美元的花销得到的收益仅有10美元。
Those seeking to understand how Canadians have pulled it off are given two answers: governance and pay. There is little political interference in the funds' operations. They attract people with backgrounds in business and finance to sit on their boards, unlike American public pension funds, which are stuffed with politicians, cronies and union hacks.
那些试图理解加拿大人如何完成这一经营的人得到两个答案，一是监管，二是支付。在基金运营过程中仅有一点点政治方面的干涉。与美国公共养老基金充斥着政客、亲信和工会黑客不同的是，加拿大养老基金则能够吸引拥有商业和金融背景的人们加入董事会。
Just as important is their approach to compensation. In order to recruit the best executives, Canadian pension funds have ensured their pay is competitive with Bay Street, Toronto's version of Wall Street. They pay a base salary, annual bonus and long-term performance award (which many pension funds elsewhere do not) to make their employees take a long-term view of investments. Mr Leech of Ontario Teachers made over C3.9m dollar in 2010; 51% of that was a long-term performance award, 36% his annual bonus and only 13% of his base salary. He would doubtless earn more on Wall Street, but this is a huge pay packet by public-pension standards. Anne Stausboll, the boss of CalPERS, the largest American public pension fund, made around 380,000 dollar in the year to June 30th 2011, including a 96,638 dollar bonus.
同样重要的是他们的薪酬体系。为了招募到最优秀的高管，加拿大养老基金保证他们支付的薪酬在Bay Street（加拿大的华尔街）是最具竞争力的。他们支付的薪酬包括基本工资，年终红利以及长期绩效奖金（这是其它养老基金没有的薪酬制度）来让它的雇员从长远来考虑它们的投资。安大略省教师养老基金的Leech先生2010年拿到了390万加元。其中长期绩效奖金为51%，年终红利占了36%，基本工资仅占了13%。在华尔街他无疑会赚的更多，但是按照公共养老金标准来看，这已经是巨额薪酬了。。最大的美国公共养老基金CalPERS的老板Anne Stausboll在2011年上半年拿到了38万美元，其中包括96，638美元的红利。
Such disparity may hinder the Canadian model's spread. Joe Dear, the chief investment officer of CalPERS, has said it is “not politically feasible” to set up this sort of compensation structure. For politicians, not to mention voters, multi-million-dollar salaries are not going to be popular.
薪酬体系上的差距阻碍了加拿大模式的推广。CalPERS的首席投资官Joe Dear认为建立这种薪酬体系没有政治上的可行性。对政客来讲，更不用说选民，拿百万年薪的人毕竟是少数。
Many officials at American public pension funds would not want to copy the model anyway. If a big deal were to go south, they might be sued. But Mr Ambachtsheer says board members also have a fiduciary duty to consider how fees are eroding assets. If they have an option to pay 90% less, they should try to take it.
不管怎样，多数美国公共养老基金的官员并不想照搬加拿大模式。如果大宗交易失败的话，他们可能会被起诉。但Ambachtsheer先生认为董事会的成员基于信用责任，应该仔细考虑这些费用是如何侵蚀资产的。如果他们可以选择少花90%的钱，那他们应该试着去接受。
Another obstacle to the adoption of Canadian ways is scale. A fund needs to be a certain size to buy companies and invest in infrastructure projects, and to swallow the upfront costs of building internal teams. Smaller Canadian funds have been unable to follow suit, for example. Sometimes the large funds will syndicate their deals and give the minnows a chance to take part. In 2009 OMERS won approval to manage assets of smaller pension funds in Canada.
采用加拿大模式的另一个障碍是规模问题。基金要有一定的规模，以便用来收购公司和投资基础设施工程，而且要为团队建设付出先期成本。小规模的加拿大养老基金根本不可能依样画瓢。例如，有时大型基金将它们的交易联合组成辛迪加，让小规模的基金也加入进来。在2009年，安大略省市政雇员退休体系被批准经营加拿大小规模养老基金资产。
The giants face problems of their own. One, paradoxically, is the growth of assets: CPP, for example, expects to manage C275 billion dollar by 2020 and C1 trillion dollar by 2050. Getting bigger makes it harder for each investment to make a difference to overall returns. “How we can scale our direct investing so it continues to be meaningful in a fund that's doubled its size is a challenge,” says David Denison, CPP's boss.
这个基金巨人自身也面临不少问题。第一个，也是自相矛盾的就是其资产的增长：例如CPP期望到2020年能管理2750亿加元，到2050年其管理的资产能达到1万亿加元。资产的增加使得每一项投资回报对总体收益的影响越来越小。“我们如何才能扩大我们的直接投资，使它在增加了一倍的基金里仍然举足轻重，这是一个挑战。”CPP的老板David Denison说道。
Another challenge is handling expansion into more volatile emerging markets. To find good deals, funds need people on the ground. But as they become global, they may spread themselves too thinly. The Canadian model assumes that diversification is not as important as deep knowledge: the funds are likely to be better at doing deals in Montreal than Moscow. Some funds have opened foreign offices, but Mr Fyfe of PSP Investments is wary: “These people are going to be sitting there telling you to do a deal, so they're not irrelevant.”
另一项挑战就是在变化多端的新兴市场中不断扩大市场份额。为了拓展业务，基金会需要员工辛勤工作。但是随着他们的业务扩展到全球，他们有点疲于应付（应付不过来）。加拿大模式认为多样化不及专业化重要：蒙特利尔的业务比莫斯科开展得好。一些基金开设了海外办事处，但Fyfe先生对此持谨慎态度：“一些业务员乐于坐在那里来告诉你如何做业务，因此他们也不是事不关己。”
Even so, Canadian pensions are primed to do well in these dismal times. Some are planning to do more in credit, since banks are lending less. Cash-strapped governments are also lining up a huge number of infrastructure-asset sales. Politicians find the Canadians cuddlier partners than many others. According to Michael Sabia, the boss of Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec, another pension-fund group: “If they're faced with the consortium of ‘Bonfire of the Vanities' from New York versus a consortium of large public institutions who are long-term investors… I think I know who they're going to pick.”
即便如此，加拿大养老基金在大萧条时期仍有望蒸蒸日上。他们计划在贷款方面拓展业务，因为银行贷款在不断减少。政府也面临现金短缺的问题，因此他们正在计划出售一大批基础设施资产。政客们认为加拿大人是最佳人选。另一家名为Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec养老基金老板Michael Sabia认为，“如果他们面临在虚荣的篝火式的财团与长期投资者组成的公共慈善机构式的财团之间作出抉择的话，我想我应该知道哪种方案能胜出。”