|
????哈佛大學（Harvard University）的捐贈基金截至6月底資產規模為327億美元，在全美所有大學或學院中規模第一。根據《財富》（Fortune）雜志的分析，哈佛大學捐贈基金過去5年的投資回報落后于任何同類基金。 ????哈佛雇員和校友可能都對此大感意外，因為他們一直被告知，這家捐贈基金的投資管理機構——哈佛管理公司(Harvard Management Company)的表現總是優于基準。比方說，哈佛管理公司的CEO簡?曼迪羅9月份就在一封公開信中這樣寫到： ????“這是哈佛管理公司投資回報連續四年超出Policy Portfolio基準。正如我們所指，投資回報超出以Policy Portfolio為代表的市場水平并不是一件容易的事，不是每年一定都能做到的?！?/p> ????但事實是這些門檻是預先設定的底限，是為了確保捐贈基金充分滿足哈佛大學的財務需求，不是一個相對于其他學校（或更廣范圍的市場指數）的投資表現評判標準。 ????如果跟其他學校進行橫向比較，哈佛慘敗。哈佛基金的5年年化投資回報率為1.7%?？勺鲄⒖嫉氖?，同期，在美國25家最大的學院或大學捐贈基金中，哈佛是唯一一只回報率低于2%的捐贈基金，排在它后面的康奈爾大學（Cornell University）為2.2%。而且，根據投資咨詢機構Wilshire Associates，它的數據庫中資產規模超過5億美元的17只大學捐贈基金的5年投資回報率中值為3.38%（相信樣本中沒有包含哈佛大學）。 ????難怪曼迪羅公開信中的“投資回報”圖少了一個時間段： |
????Harvard University has the nation's largest college or university endowment, valued at $32.7 billion through the end of June. It also has worse investment returns than any of its peers over the past five years, according to a Fortune analysis. ????This may come as a surprise to Harvard employees and alums, who have been told that the endowment's investment arm -- Harvard Management Company -- regularly beats its benchmarks. For example, HMC CEO Jane Mendillo wrote the following last month in a public letter: ????"This also marks the fourth consecutive year in which HMC's return exceeded the Policy Portfolio benchmark. As we have noted previously, earning returns in excess of the markets as represented in the Policy Portfolio is not easily done and is not expected every year." ????But the reality is that such thresholds are pre-set as baselines for making sure that the endowment can adequately meet the university's financial needs, rather than judgments on HMC's performance relative to other large schools (or to broader market indices). ????On that latter basis, Harvard has been a virtual trainwreck. Its five-year annualized performance is 1.7%. For context, Harvard is the only one of the 25 largest U.S. college or university endowments to have returned less than 2% over that time period, with the next closest being Cornell University at 2.2%. Moreover, investment advisory firm Wilshire Associates reports a median five-year return of 3.38% for the 17 schools within its database that have endowments larger than $500 million (Harvard is not believed to be included in that sample). ????No wonder the "Investment Return" chart in Mendillo's letter was missing a certain time period: |
|
????????同樣值得關注的是，曼迪羅自2008年7月1日接任CEO，與這5年的時間段完全吻合。誠然，她接手這個投資組后后幾個月，雷曼兄弟（Lehman Brothers）就倒閉了，而2009財政年度-27.3%的投資回報應歸咎于穆罕默德?埃里安【現任太平洋投資管理公司(PIMCO)CEO】。 ????話雖如此，其他捐贈基金也得應對金融危機的挑戰。而且，哈佛此后的投資回報也沒什么值得大書特書的成績。它的3年投資回報率在我們的分組中排第20名，1年投資回報率更是落在了下游。 ????一些了解狀況的人士為哈佛低于平均水平的表現做了三點辯護： ????1.基金規模越大，投資表現要想優于市場就越難。 |
????Equally notable is that the five-year period matches up exactly to when Mendillo took over as CEO, on July 1, 2008. To be sure, she inherited the portfolio just months before Lehman Brothers collapsed, and most of the fiscal 2009 return of negative 27.3% can be pinned on her predecessor Mohamed El-Erian (now CEO of PIMCO). ????That said, other endowments also had to weather the financial crisis. Moreover, Harvard's more recent returns also aren't much to write home about. It's three-year figure ranks 20th in our group, and its one-year return is easily in the bottom half. ????Those close to the situation offer three defenses for Harvard's sub-par performance: ????1. The larger you are, the harder it is to outperform. |
最新文章