下一个顶级型号：猕猴桃

当政府举行推出主权资金或公共养老基金时，他们常常偏见，假设这些资金永远无法与私营部门竞争。随着时间的推移，这一假设是为了使这些资金的赞助商在资源负责人的资源下，同时过度支付外部资产管理人员和服务提供者。这产生了一个恶性的下行周期，养老金越来越依赖外部经理（谁越来越多地过度收取他们声称超出其能力的服务）。结果，很多人真正相信投资管理是只有私营部门可以做的事情;公共部门组织不可避免地功能失调，应免受自己的保护......

And then this happens:A sovereign fund drops some science on the investment management industry with a 26% year and a 9% decennial IRR. That SWF is the New Zealand Superannuation Fund, and it is fundamentally challenging the notion that public funds can’t compete with the private sector.

因此,我认为这可能是我们硬币一个新的时间“top model” of institutional investment. But before we get there, let’s review some of the existing models:

- The Norway Model:In this model,investors rely almost exclusivelyon publicly traded securities and are highly diversified (to the point of being almost indexed). The funds’ returns are basically market returns, as the priority is diversification and cost minimization. Indeed, unlike other models of institutional investment, the Norway Model understands that compounding fees and costs can be devastating for a portfolio. It’s for this reason that 96% of NBIM’s assets are managed in-house.

- 耶鲁型号：In this model,投资者在资产课程中多样化并为非传统资产分配重要部分，包括对冲基金，私募股权和房地产。这是一种依赖外部基金经理的模型，由于alpha生产者的稀缺而难以规模。与挪威模型不同，抛弃成本遏制，以支持净额收益率。

- The Canada Model:This is a model thatprioritizes in-house asset managementand the development of highly skilled teams of investment professionals that canaccess investment opportunities on their own.The foundation for this model is its independent and expert governance structure, which in turn allows these organizations to properly resource investment operations (i.e., pay decent salaries).

- 荷兰语模型：This is a modelbased on innovation, professionalization and risk sharing.The big Dutch funds, such as PGGM and APG, have also been instrumental in the development of and implementation of liability driven investing.

- The American Model:This is a model that is based on politicized and under-resourced investment operations that one outgoing public pension fund CIOrecently described as “a travesty”.我认为这是我对美国模型（以及它在澳大利亚，日本和英国的复制）的挫败感，让我关注了我对加拿大模型的关注，现在是猕猴桃模型。

- The Kiwi Model:I’d argue that institutional investorsout on the frontiers of finance have a new model:nzsf。这是一家位于奥克兰的公共部门投资组织，该组织正在产生坚实的二年级投资回报。

This then begs an important question: What are the differentiating characteristics of the Kiwi Model? As with all the (real) “Models”, there is a solid governance structure that seems to understand how to resource an investment organization properly. As such, the fund has focused intently on building a strong team of investment professionals and empowering them. But I think what separates the NZSF from other funds is the way it thinks about accessing investment opportunities and what this implies about the organization as a whole.

NZSF Chair Gavin Walker describes the SWF’s approach as a simpler and more direct approach to investing: ‘By cost-effective we mean that we pay minimum cost for pure market exposure and only pay more if we have a high level of confidence of value being added. It also means we have an efficient business model and understand the optimal trade-off between internal and external management.’

The fund has fewer, but deeper, relationships with external managers. It also has fewer, but more concentrated, investments. In short, it believes that less is more; it isn't playing the over-diversification game.

In a way, then, the Kiwi Model is the antithesis of where this blog post started: It is a public fund that believes in its own ability to execute. It’s not entirely in-sourced like many of the Canadian funds. Rather, the Kiwi Model is one in which the sponsor simply believes in the fund’s ability to pick successful managers and investments. It’s confident in its own capabilities, and that confidence creates a virtuous cycle of outperformance...