哈佛：辦學(xué)有方，投資無(wú)術(shù)
|
????哈佛大學(xué)（Harvard University）的捐贈(zèng)基金截至6月底資產(chǎn)規(guī)模為327億美元，在全美所有大學(xué)或?qū)W院中規(guī)模第一。根據(jù)《財(cái)富》（Fortune）雜志的分析，哈佛大學(xué)捐贈(zèng)基金過(guò)去5年的投資回報(bào)落后于任何同類基金。 ????哈佛雇員和校友可能都對(duì)此大感意外，因?yàn)樗麄円恢北桓嬷@家捐贈(zèng)基金的投資管理機(jī)構(gòu)——哈佛管理公司(Harvard Management Company)的表現(xiàn)總是優(yōu)于基準(zhǔn)。比方說(shuō)，哈佛管理公司的CEO簡(jiǎn)?曼迪羅9月份就在一封公開(kāi)信中這樣寫(xiě)到： ????“這是哈佛管理公司投資回報(bào)連續(xù)四年超出Policy Portfolio基準(zhǔn)。正如我們所指，投資回報(bào)超出以Policy Portfolio為代表的市場(chǎng)水平并不是一件容易的事，不是每年一定都能做到的。” ????但事實(shí)是這些門檻是預(yù)先設(shè)定的底限，是為了確保捐贈(zèng)基金充分滿足哈佛大學(xué)的財(cái)務(wù)需求，不是一個(gè)相對(duì)于其他學(xué)校（或更廣范圍的市場(chǎng)指數(shù)）的投資表現(xiàn)評(píng)判標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。 ????如果跟其他學(xué)校進(jìn)行橫向比較，哈佛慘敗。哈佛基金的5年年化投資回報(bào)率為1.7%?？勺鲄⒖嫉氖牵?，在美國(guó)25家最大的學(xué)院或大學(xué)捐贈(zèng)基金中，哈佛是唯一一只回報(bào)率低于2%的捐贈(zèng)基金，排在它后面的康奈爾大學(xué)（Cornell University）為2.2%。而且，根據(jù)投資咨詢機(jī)構(gòu)Wilshire Associates，它的數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)中資產(chǎn)規(guī)模超過(guò)5億美元的17只大學(xué)捐贈(zèng)基金的5年投資回報(bào)率中值為3.38%（相信樣本中沒(méi)有包含哈佛大學(xué)）。 ????難怪曼迪羅公開(kāi)信中的“投資回報(bào)”圖少了一個(gè)時(shí)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(guān)注的是，曼迪羅自2008年7月1日接任CEO，與這5年的時(shí)間段完全吻合。誠(chéng)然，她接手這個(gè)投資組后后幾個(gè)月，雷曼兄弟（Lehman Brothers）就倒閉了，而2009財(cái)政年度-27.3%的投資回報(bào)應(yīng)歸咎于穆罕默德?埃里安【現(xiàn)任太平洋投資管理公司(PIMCO)CEO】。 ????話雖如此，其他捐贈(zèng)基金也得應(yīng)對(duì)金融危機(jī)的挑戰(zhàn)。而且，哈佛此后的投資回報(bào)也沒(méi)什么值得大書(shū)特書(shū)的成績(jī)。它的3年投資回報(bào)率在我們的分組中排第20名，1年投資回報(bào)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(xiàn)做了三點(diǎn)辯護(hù)： ????1.基金規(guī)模越大，投資表現(xiàn)要想優(yōu)于市場(chǎng)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