Advertisement

Financial Markets and Portfolio Management

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 53–76 | Cite as

Institutional spending policies: implications for future asset values and spending

  • Snorre LindsetEmail author
  • Egil Matsen
Article
  • 111 Downloads

Abstract

University endowments, sovereign wealth funds, and foundations support spending. In this paper, we analyze how different spending policies affect future asset values and spending opportunities. We show that the covariance between the asset returns and the spending rate implied by the spending policy is important in this regard. Many of the spending policies used in practice aim at smoothing the spending level by letting current spending be a function of both current asset values and earlier spending levels. One feature of these types of spending policies is that the funds can be depleted. Depleted funds cannot support spending.

Keywords

Endowments Sovereign wealth funds Endowment spending policies 

JEL Classification

G11 G23 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge helpful comments from an anonymous referee and the editor, as well as from Gunnar Bårdsen, John Campbell, Knut Anton Mork, and Svein-Arne Persson. The paper was partially written while Lindset was a visiting research scholar at the University of Central Florida and while Matsen was a visiting research scholar at Harvard University.

References

  1. Acharya, S., Dimson, E.: Endowment Asset Management. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander, S., Herring, A.: Endowment spending policy at MIT. MIT Fac. Newsl. XX 5, 6–8 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. Ameriks, J., Jaconetti, C.M.: Endowment and Foundation Spending Guidelines. Vanguard Investment Counseling and Research, The Vanguard Group, Valley Forge (2006)Google Scholar
  4. Ang, A.: The four benchmarks of sovereign wealth funds. In: Bolton, P., Samama, F., Stiglitz, J.E. (eds.) Sovereign Wealth Funds and Long-Term Investing. Columbia University Press, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  5. Ang, A.: Asset Management: A Systematic Approach to Factor Investing. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bengen, W.P.: Determining withdrawal rates using historical data. J. Financ. Plan. 17, 64 (1994)Google Scholar
  7. Blume, M.E.: Endowment spending in volatile markets: What should fiduciaries do? Rev. Quant. Financ. Account. 35(2), 163–178 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bolton, P., Samama, F., Stiglitz, J.E.: Sovereign Wealth Funds and Long-Term Investing. Columbia University Press, New York (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, D.T., Scholz, D.A.: Discount Rates and Asset Returns: Implications for Endowment Strategies. Available at SSRN: https://doi.org/ssrn.com/abstract=2895022 (2017)
  10. Brown, J.R., Dimmock, S.G., Kang, J.-K., Weisbenner, S.J.: How university endowments respond to financial market shocks: evidence and implications. Am. Econ. Rev. 104(3), 931–962 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, K. C., and Tiu, C. I.: The Interaction of Spending Policies, Asset Allocation Strategies, and Investment Performance at University Endowment Funds. NBER Working Paper No. w19517. Available at SSRN: https://doi.org/ssrn.com/abstract=2339411 (2013)
  12. Campbell, J.: Investing and spending: the twin challenges of university endowment management. Forum for the Future of Higher Education Symposium, Aspen, CO, pp. 32–41 (2012)Google Scholar
  13. Cochrane, J.H.: Presidential address: discount rates. J. Financ. 66(4), 1047–1108 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duffie, D.: Dynamic Asset Pricing Theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2001)Google Scholar
  15. Dybvig, P.H.: Using asset allocation to protect spending. Financ. Anal. J. 55(1), 49–60 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Greenspan, A.: The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World. Penguin Press, London (2007)Google Scholar
  17. Hansmann, H.: Why do universities have endowments. J. Legal Stud. 19(1), 3–42 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mehrling, P., Goldstein, P., Sedlacek, V.: Endowment spending: goals, rates, and rules. Forum Futures 67–72 (2005)Google Scholar
  19. Merton, R.C.: Lifetime portfolio selection under uncertainty: the continuous time case. Rev. Econ. Stat. 51, 247–257 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Merton, R.C.: Optimum consumption and portfolio rules in a continuous-time model. J. Econ. Theory 3, 373–413 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Merton, R.C.: “Optimal Investment Strategies for University Endowment Funds” in studies of supply and demand in higher education. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1993)Google Scholar
  22. Samuelson, P.A.: Lifetime portfolio selection by dynamic stochastic programming. Rev. Econ. Stat. 51(3), 239–246 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Swensen, D.F.: Pioneering Portfolio Management: An Unconventional Approach to Institutional Investment. Free Press, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  24. Tobin, J.: What is permanent endowment income? Am. Econ. Rev. 64(2), 427–432 (1974)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Swiss Society for Financial Market Research 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.Norges BankOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations