Ten Mistakes in Investment Policy Development

May 09, 2024

Since GEM’s inception, we have probably seen over five hundred Investment Policy Statements. Though they’ve varied in length, style, and level of detail, we’ve observed that there is a consistent and recurring set of issues related to Purpose, Governance, Construction, Evaluation, and Alignment.

With this framework, we further explore the ten mistakes we most often see in investment policy development:

  1. An undefined purpose
  2. Vague investment goals
  3. Unclear roles and responsibilities
  4. Under- or over-diversification
  5. Assuming historical correlations will hold
  6. Mistaking legal structures for investment strategies
  7. Confusing beta and alpha
  8. Lacking specific benchmarks and time periods
  9. Too much backseat driving
  10. No linkage between the institution, the spending policy, and the IPS

Read our whitepaper to learn more about the importance of carefully crafting an Investment Policy Statement to ensure successful execution of your investment program into perpetuity.

 

Read More

Recent Insights

In Defense of the Endowment Model, Accurately Assessed

In the second of his three-part series on the Endowment Model, Deputy CIO Matt Bank examines the incomplete quantitative arguments around endowment performance and offers a more substantive evaluation framework.

Endowments and foundations race to outsource investment management

As many smaller endowments and foundations opt to outsource their investment management, the Financial Times spoke to GEM's Deputy CIO Matt Bank about how this arrangement can be beneficial to such institutions.

In Defense of the Endowment Model, Rightly Understood

The first of Deputy CIO Matt Bank’s new series, The Long View, reaffirms GEM’s belief that the Endowment Model – in the right hands, for the right institutions – remains a compelling means of achieving risk-adjusted returns.

Connect with us

Let’s start a conversation about how we can help.