Re: So many funds obtained over 20%

Singaporeans CPF balances are used to buy Singapore
governmen bonds at low interest rates of 2 - 4 %.
These funds were then used by GIC to invest outside
Singapore to earn return of over 8%. This is only 30 -40%
of what these American funds are earning.
So we can conclude that the GIC under Lee Kuan Yew
is underperforming. This expose the bull*** that Lee Kuan
Yew dished out to Singaporeans that they are the best and
thus have to be paid the world's highest salary.
The truth of the matter is that the pap government has managed
to accumulate so much $$$$ because they have been
cheating on Singaporeans thru the CPF.


"zanzibar" <zanzibar_duck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1190914065.509861.22540@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Sep 27, 7:29 am, "truth" <tr...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From :http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/business/27yale.html

The Yale Endowment, which has led the academic world in investment
performance over the last decade, posted a 28 percent return yesterday
for
the fiscal year ended June 30, bringing its total value to $22.5 billion.

The endowment, which has been run by David F. Swensen since 1988,
outperformed all its competitors, according to preliminary data widely
circulated among endowment offices.

The Yale Endowment has had a 17.8 percent average annual return over the
last decade, beating Harvard, its nearest rival in size, by 2.8
percentage
points. During that 10-year period, Princeton came closest to Yale, with
a
16.2 percent return.

The second-best-performing school last year was Amherst College, which
generated a 27.8 percent return, to raise its value to $1.7 billion.
Generally the larger university endowments do better than the smaller
ones,
according to data compiled by the National Association of College and
University Business Officers.

Among the top 10 performing endowments last year, Notre Dame, Duke,
Michigan, Virginia and Northwestern all had returns over 25 percent.
Notre
Dame came in third behind Yale and Amherst at 25.9 percent. Harvard,
which
has been in the news lately because of the sudden departure of its
investment chief, Mohamed A. El-Erian, posted a 23 percent return,
bringing
its endowment to $34.9 billion.

Many indexes also posted very strong results in the fiscal year. The
Wilshire 5000 was up 19.6 percent, and the Standard & Poor? 500-stock
index
rose 18.36 percent, while the Morgan Stanley Emerging Markets index rose
41.76 percent.

Nevertheless, Mr. Swensen, who was an early leader in creating a strategy
of
investments diversified beyond stocks and bonds, outperformed rivals. He
argued in his book ?ioneering Portfolio Management?that depending solely
on
stocks and bonds would not necessarily provide enough protection to a
fund.
His approach has led Yale? endowment into hedge funds, private equity
funds
and hard assets like timber and oil and gas, and made his performance one
that is closely watched by Wall Street.

A growing number of schools have followed suit. ?hat Swensen taught
everyone
to do was not to get the preferred return on bonds because it was too low
and to control risk by diversification and careful selection of managers,
and he is very good at picking managers,?said Bruce C.N. Greenwald,
professor of finance at Columbia University Business School.

While fiscal 2007 was a generally bullish time for markets, the last
several
months have been tumultuous as the housing market debacle took its toll
on
many investors. Mr. Swensen said that in the last three months, the
university had posted ?odest positive investment returns.?

But he was noncommittal about the coming months. ?hings look tough to me,
but that is always the case,?he said.

While Yale? 28 percent return appears to be the best return last year for
a
university endowment, in 2000 Yale had a 41 percent return, Mr. Swensen
said
in an e-mail message. ?ut the dollar gains were less because we were
working
with a lower base,?he wrote. ?ur $5 billion of fiscal year 2007
investment
gains amazes me.?

The endowment? performance has become increasingly crucial to Yale.
Projected spending from the endowment in the university? 2007-8 fiscal
year
is $843 million, or 37 percent of Yale? net revenue. The endowment?
contribution to Yale? operating budget has increased nearly fourfold in
10
years, and is its single largest source of support.

Yale? endowment continues to be diversified, but Mr. Swensen declined to
say
which asset class performed best. His target asset allocation for fiscal
2008 is fairly similar to the allocation for 2007. The biggest allocation
?28 percent of Yale? funds ?is in real assets. Last year, those included
real estate, oil and gas and timberland, Yale? report showed.

The second-largest allocation is to what Yale calls absolute return
investments, which generally means hedge funds. Yale is slightly reducing
that stake to 23 percent, from 25 percent, according to Mr. Swensen.

The endowment is also planning a slight reduction in domestic equities to
11
percent, from 12 percent. Fixed-income and private equity will remain at
4
percent and 15 percent respectively, and private equity is increasing 2
percentage points to 19 percent, Mr. Swensen said.

Mr. Swensen said yesterday that nearly all the numbers that universities
reported were above the Cambridge Associates median 19.3 percent for
colleges and universities. ?his is another case of the larger endowments
(with diversified, equity-oriented portfolios) doing better than the
smaller
endowments,?he said.

The endowment world is extremely competitive. As one expert on endowments
noted, it was an easy year to have a relatively high number, but for
endowment managers the question was how they did against the internal
benchmarks they create for each asset class. For equities, that could be
the
Wilshire 5000 or the S.&P., for example. For hedge funds, it might be the
performance of funds of funds that own a range of hedge funds. An equally
important measure is how the endowment did against its peers.

Not only Yale. but also Harvard University, too. Their return is 28
to 36% net ( after paying commisions on its return).

Why is the Singapore govt keeps saying the risk-free return is
achievable only at 2.5%.

In Harvard, the investment return is a result from the investment of
the Harvard's staff and employees superannuation scheme which is
similar to CPF here.

If they can achieve at between 28% and 35%, why is that they are not
averse to risk of losing it at all given the high return on it.

Seriously where is CPF money was taken to, by whom, is it Temasek or
GIC or whoever took the money should be clearly answered and
explained.

In addtion there should be a option in which CPF member could take
out the money out of CPF to be given to external private fund managers
who can give investors a return of between 28% and 36% net return on
the invested CPF fund.

Since the Govt is not confidence of making such high return to its CPF
investors, they should allow then allow the people to take their CPF
money to govt-ceritfied fund manager people so that we can learn to
make sharp investment choice.



.

Loading