Kings College Bursar Case Summary

432 Words1 Page

Question 2

The advantages of retaining internal control on endowment allocation across asset classes and managers are the assets manage by internal managers. Because of it, the decision making between Kings College bursar and investment committee regarding the endowment performance is efficient. Moreover, Kings College has no relationship and no administrative burden to take care of. Finally, passive investment in equity index funds fit with the risk preferences of investment committee. The long-run objectives were to achieve total return of 3.35% with the least possible risk.

Whereas, the disadvantages of retaining internal control are hard for King’s college bursar to gain approval from the investment committee when he wants to move to active investments due to the passive investment always achieve the targeted return. Although King’s College using Schroder advice on investing, they still reluctant to get …show more content…

CUEF diversify its portfolio of managers with the largest has 7% of the assets. Meanwhile, the internal office manages Beta using equity index futures and index funds. Using that strategies, asset allocation was relatively stable and CUEF make tactical movements rather than strategic macro-market timers. Long-run objectives was to achieve an average annual rate of total return, net of costs, equal to 5,25% plus retail price inflation.

On the other hand, the cons of outsourcing the endowment to CUEF are the investment through separate account is more expensive, no set long term asset allocation (policy portfolio), smaller allocation to private equity, spending now rather than keep the endowment for future students, investors cannot pick their managers and no look through the underlying managers, investors paid the direct costs of managing CUEF 0.12% per year of the value of the assets plus fees charged by

More about Kings College Bursar Case Summary

Open Document