Sentry Page Protection

Please Wait...

## Retirement Fund Current Model Portfolios

*** The current active model portfolio for**

"Risk-Reduction Level - I"

__Overall Portfolio Holdings__is the"Risk-Reduction Level - I"

**Model Portfolio Overview**

Below is the current asset allocation models for retirement fund accounts. There are 2 distinct model portfolios defined as follows:

Ongoing recurrent contribution models are typically not changed unless a severe bear market associated with a recession is indicated or a selected fund has substantially under-performed its peer group (at which point it is replaced with another equivalent fund).

Overall portfolio holdings are altered according to indications from our 5-Factor model. There are 3 portfolios aligned in accordance with market conditions:

**1. Systematic Ongoing Contributions**(weekly/monthly/quarterly ongoing investment contributions)Ongoing recurrent contribution models are typically not changed unless a severe bear market associated with a recession is indicated or a selected fund has substantially under-performed its peer group (at which point it is replaced with another equivalent fund).

__Two tables are provided:__- One table for "Generic" ongoing contributions for those investing in portfolios outside the Emirates Group Provident Scheme (EGPS).
- One table for those using the EGPS.

**2. Overall Portfolio holdings**Overall portfolio holdings are altered according to indications from our 5-Factor model. There are 3 portfolios aligned in accordance with market conditions:

- Full Risk Model Portfolio
- Risk Reduction Level I Model Portfolio
- Risk Reduction Level II Model Portfolio

__Two tables are provided:__- One table for "Generic" ongoing contributions for those investing in portfolios outside the Emirates Group Provident Scheme (EGPS).
- One table for those using the EGPS.

**Systematic Ongoing Monthly Contributions**Ongoing model contributions to retirement accounts (weekly/monthly/quarterly)

We conduct a complete review each of the funds within the Emirates Group Provident Scheme (EGPS) quarterly to ensure "best-of-breed" funds are maintained within our model portfolios. The below EGPS allocation model is changed if a given fund has under-performed over a 2-3 year period relative to its peer group. If so, an alternative fund is provided (if available within EGPS).

**are typically not adjusted as market conditions change**. This allows investors to take advantage of "dollar cost averaging" by way of purchasing increased units-per-unit price in a given fund over the decline phase of a complete market cycle.We conduct a complete review each of the funds within the Emirates Group Provident Scheme (EGPS) quarterly to ensure "best-of-breed" funds are maintained within our model portfolios. The below EGPS allocation model is changed if a given fund has under-performed over a 2-3 year period relative to its peer group. If so, an alternative fund is provided (if available within EGPS).

**Emirates Group Provident Scheme (EGPS)**

**Risk Group Adjusted Model**

SystematicOngoing ContributionsSystematic

__Overall Portfolio Holdings__

Overall portfolio holdings are adjusted for risk to protect accrued market returns from potential bear market declines.

Currently the

Below is the Generic and Emirates Group Provident Scheme (EGPS) tables.

- Risk-Reduction Level I reduces portfolio equity risk by -50%.
- Risk-Reduction Level II reduces portfolio equity risk an additional -25%.

Currently the

**(-50% reduction in equity exposure from respective "Full Risk" equity holdings).**__Risk-Reduction Level I model portfolio is active__Below is the Generic and Emirates Group Provident Scheme (EGPS) tables.

**Risk Reduction Methodology Overview**

The overall portfolio holdings model is adjusted for changing market conditions using our 5-factor model. The model reduces portfolio risk in 3 phases as conditions begin to deteriorate to protect investment capital from severe bear market declines.

**Full Risk 5-Factor model conditions**

*Overall Portfolio Holding*s model will match the*Systematic Ongoing Contributions*model as discussed above.As our 5-factor model reverts negative our model begins a phased reduction in equities as follows:

**Risk Reduction Level I 5-Factor model conditions**

**Risk Reduction Level II 5-Factor model conditions**

*** Note: For Russell Funds please see below****Russell Funds**

The Russell family of funds incorporate their own risk management process at the fund-family level utilizing Value-at-Risk (VaR) parameters. Details of the specific methods they utilize are included in the below document copied from their prospectus.

As an overview, Value-at-Risk is a statistical measure of the "riskiness" of a portfolio. It is defined as the maximum dollar amount expected to be lost over a given time horizon, at a predefined confidence level. For example, if the 95% one-month VAR is $1 million, there is 95% confidence that over the next month the portfolio will not lose more than $1 million.

As Russell uses their own internal risk reduction, portfolio models are not altered for Russell funds when conditions warrant a Risk Reduction Level I portfolio. However, we do not believe Russell's risk reduction is sufficient for severe bear market conditions

When severe Risk Reduction Level II conditions are present, the Russell fund model holdings are reduced by -50% as their VaR risk management process does not adequately protect from severe bear market conditions associated with recessionary conditions.

There are several way to determine VaR:

VaR suffers from a number of drawbacks. Firstly, while quantifying the potential loss within that level, it gives no indication of the size of the loss associated with the tail of the probability distribution out of the confidence level. Secondly, it is not additive, so VaR figures of components of a portfolio do not add to the VaR of the overall portfolio, because this measure does not take correlations into account and a simple addition could lead to double counting. Lastly, different calculation methods give different results.

As an overview, Value-at-Risk is a statistical measure of the "riskiness" of a portfolio. It is defined as the maximum dollar amount expected to be lost over a given time horizon, at a predefined confidence level. For example, if the 95% one-month VAR is $1 million, there is 95% confidence that over the next month the portfolio will not lose more than $1 million.

As Russell uses their own internal risk reduction, portfolio models are not altered for Russell funds when conditions warrant a Risk Reduction Level I portfolio. However, we do not believe Russell's risk reduction is sufficient for severe bear market conditions

__so when Risk Reduction Level II conditions are present adjustments are made to model allocations.__**Russell Risk Reduction Process**When severe Risk Reduction Level II conditions are present, the Russell fund model holdings are reduced by -50% as their VaR risk management process does not adequately protect from severe bear market conditions associated with recessionary conditions.

There are several way to determine VaR:

- it can be calculated under the parametric method (also known as variance-covariance method) as a function of mean and variance of the returns series, assuming normal distribution.
- with the historical method, VAR is determined by taking the returns belonging to the lowest quintile of the series (identified by the confidence level) and observing the highest of those returns.
- the Monte Carlo method simulates large numbers of scenarios for the portfolio and determines VAR by observing the distribution of the resulting paths.

VaR suffers from a number of drawbacks. Firstly, while quantifying the potential loss within that level, it gives no indication of the size of the loss associated with the tail of the probability distribution out of the confidence level. Secondly, it is not additive, so VaR figures of components of a portfolio do not add to the VaR of the overall portfolio, because this measure does not take correlations into account and a simple addition could lead to double counting. Lastly, different calculation methods give different results.

**Russell Funds VaR Risk Management Process (from Prospectus)**