View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

ESSAYS ON ISSUES

THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK
OF CHICAGO

DECEMBER 2007
NUMBER 245a

Chicago Fed Letter
Has risk management in private equity
kept pace with rapid growth?
by William Mark, lead examiner, Supervision and Regulation, and head, Private Equity Merchant Banking Knowledge Center,
and Steven VanBever, lead supervision analyst, Supervision and Regulation

The Federal Reserve System’s Private Equity Merchant Banking Knowledge Center, formed
at the Chicago Fed in 2000 after the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act was passed, sponsors an annual
conference on new industry developments. This article summarizes the 2007 conference,
Private Equity Has Gone Big … Has Risk Management Kept Pace?, held August 2–3.

Private equity refers to any
type of equity investment in an
asset in which the equity is
not freely tradable on a public
stock market. The agenda for
the conference is available at
www.chicagofed.org/banking_
information/2007_pemb_
conference_agenda.pdf.

At the time of the conference, the private equity industry was facing a rapidly
changing environment. Credit markets
were becoming more restrictive and risk
averse, turning away from the low interest rates and accommodative credit
terms that had prevailed for several years
and had facilitated rapid growth in private equity investing. Private equity firms
were facing the prospect of fewer deals,
higher borrowing costs, tighter terms,
and a reduced availability of leverage.1
They also risked losing their competitive
edge compared with more-traditional,
strategic buyers. A number of conference
participants addressed these changes and
their possible effects on private equity.
Current risks in private equity

In his opening remarks, Michael H.
Moskow, then president and CEO,
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, pointed
out some of the ways that private equity
has “gone big.” These include high volumes of global mergers and acquisitions
(M&A) activity and industry fundraising,
large deal sizes and high deal prices, and
greater use of leverage.
This asset class is also seeing some significant qualitative changes. Private
equity buyout firms are targeting new
types of industries, such as financial services firms, telecom companies, and

“smokestack” industries. They are also
increasingly seeking out companies in
rapidly growing emerging markets and
beginning to engage in hostile takeovers
under select circumstances.
As private equity continues to grow and
take new directions, it has begun to attract
the attention of Congress and certain
interest groups, including organized labor.
The U.S. regulators have also articulated a regulatory philosophy for “private
pools of capital,” supporting the current
regulatory structure and recommending continued reliance on sound riskmanagement practices.
Moskow next highlighted three top risks
facing private equity. The first risk was
heavy reliance on leverage, which makes
target firms more vulnerable to rising
interest rates and economic shocks; such
reliance had been exacerbated (until just
recently) by weaker underwriting. The
second risk was potential conflicts of interest. In large complex organizations
such as global banks, conflicts of interest
can arise between private equity investing
and other roles, such as lending and advising clients on M&A. The third risk was
the lack of transparency, specifically the
unclear ownership of economic risk.
Should severe credit issues arise, it may be
hard to determine who is ultimately at risk.

Furthermore, Moskow described how
banks continue to be major participants
in the industry by managing private equity
funds; banks also continue to invest in
these funds and provide loans and services to them. What is new, however, is
that banks are beginning to emerge as
targets in private equity deals—at least
under certain special circumstances.
Leverage and legal issues related to control and permissible activities continue
to function as barriers to the expansion
of private equity into banking.
In her welcoming remarks earlier, Cathy
Lemieux, senior vice president, Federal
Reserve Bank of Chicago, had mentioned an additional risk of private equity.
She noted how credit risk had changed
because of the evolution at many banking

to borrowers. These favorable terms included loans with no required amortization and loans with few or no restrictive
covenants, known as “covenant-lite” loans.3
However, recent changes in the credit
markets are dramatically altering the
picture, Canning said. He described these
changes as a repricing of risk or market
adjustment rather than as a “credit event”
similar to the bursting of the Internet
bubble earlier this decade.
Canning also described how public companies are continuing to go private. However, the dynamics of this process are
changing, as boards of directors are becoming more assertive and the roles of
other participants, such as management,
private equity firms, and banks, are evolving in response to this assertiveness.

Three key risks of private equity have been heavy reliance on
leverage, conflicts of interest, and lack of transparency.
organizations from an “originate-andhold” strategy to an “originate-todistribute” strategy.2 This shift has been
driven by innovation in financial instruments and by rapid growth in institutional investors looking for loans to buy.
One example of this change is the rise
of “equity bridge loans,” the interim financing banks provide on some private
equity deals.
Overall, this evolution in lending has
distributed risks more widely outside the
banking system, and it has made risks,
and the pricing of risks, more transparent. However, it has also generated
new risks that are not well captured by
traditional measures of risk.
Current condition of the industry and
of credit markets

John A. Canning, Jr., Madison Dearborn
Partners, surveyed the current state of
the private equity industry by providing extensive data on the heights that
M&A volume, fundraising volume, and
transaction size had reached in recent
years. He also described how attractive
capital markets had supported transactions that featured lower credit ratings
and higher levels of leverage. Credit
terms had also become more favorable

Finally, Canning highlighted the growing backlash against the recent “surge”
in private equity activity. This backlash
has come from many parties: the press,
shareholders, sellers, regulators, labor
unions, Congress, and boards of directors. To address this, Canning argued,
the industry needs to become more
transparent and to make a better case
for the economic benefits produced by
private equity.
Meredith W. Coffey, Reuters Loan Pricing
Corporation, analyzed the relationship
between leveraged loans and private
equity, including long-term trends in the
market for leveraged buyout (LBO)
loans, as well as current market conditions. Global LBO lending had reached
record levels, and average loan size had
also grown dramatically in the first half
of the current decade. Further, loan
spreads had contracted materially, and
leverage had increased significantly.
Strong appetite for LBO loans from institutional investors had also facilitated
the development of new types of loans.
More recently, Coffey said, credit markets
have become skittish, in part because of
worries related to subprime mortgages.
This coincided with a huge supply of

leveraged loans coming to market. The
pipeline of leveraged loans was much larger than ever before, and many of these
loans were covenant-lite. In recent months,
prices for leveraged loans have been falling sharply across the secondary market.4
Although default rates, both actual and
projected, remain benign, Coffey said,
pricing behavior suggests that the market
is experiencing a significant oversupply,
an aversion to covenant-lite loans, and
an upward repricing of risk.
Key components of the private equity
process

Several of the conference sessions were
dedicated to key components of the
private equity process: fundraising, due
diligence, and exit strategies using the
secondary market. The fundraising panel
was moderated by John K. Kim, Court
Square Capital Partners, and it featured
Beverly Berman, Advent International;
Michael Bolner, Citigroup Alternative
Investments; J. Michael Ireland, Newbury
Partners; and Dale J. Meyer, KRG Capital
Partners. One newer development in
fundraising is the rise of “megafunds.”
In the 1980s, a fund in the $200 million–
$300 million range would have been
considered large; now funds can be over
$20 billion. The largest funds continue
to enjoy advantages in fundraising, with
“name brand” identity and ready access
to all sources of capital. In addition, institutional investors with small staffs (such as
some public pension funds) cannot manage a large number of fund relationships,
so they work with the largest firms exclusively to attain a certain portfolio size level.
The panelists said they expected public
pension funds to keep growing in importance to the industry. Venture capital gains
in recent years have been shared more
broadly than in past cycles, generating
more support for fundraising. In addition,
many public (and other) pension funds
face issues of underfunding and are attracted to the steep returns provided by
alternative investments, including private
equity. Finally, this source of fundraising
is only beginning to be tapped, with some
state investors still lacking any allocation
in alternative investments.
The limited partnership structure is
critical to the fundraising process, but

long-term returns vary substantially by
type of limited partner. Joshua Lerner,
Harvard Business School, presented results of studies showing that endowments
(such as universities’) typically outperform other limited partners.5 However,
banks and corporate pension funds underperform sharply. Four hypotheses may
explain the superior performance of
endowments. First, endowments have
succeeded in cultivating a “longer-run”
outlook. Second, many endowments have
had stable private equity teams over many
years, despite seemingly modest levels
of compensation. Third, many endowments carefully analyze the success or
failure of past investment decisions and
try to incorporate the lessons learned
in subsequent decisions. Fourth, effective endowment committees are willing
to delegate fund decision-making to
staff and are able to provide objective
insights into longer-term market trends.
In today’s private equity marketplace, it
is critical to understand the trends driving
tomorrow’s decisions and to tailor due
diligence accordingly. A panel representing both the fund sponsor and investment
banking perspectives presented results
of a survey conducted in June 2007 of
90 middle-market M&A professionals.
The panel was moderated by Steven
Pinsky, J. H. Cohn, and it included
Robert P. Crisp, Crowe Capital; Warren H.
Feder, Carl Marks Advisory Group; Brian
Gallagher, Twin Bridge Capital Partners;
Martin Magida, Trenwith Securities;
James P. Marra, Blue Point Capital
Partners; and Thomas M. Turmell, Golub
Capital Incorporated. The survey responses demonstrated a wide range of
opinions. For example, many respondents felt that management and investigations was the most overlooked area of due
diligence, while many others chose human
resources and benefits. A majority of respondents indicated that due diligence
in the financial and accounting area provided the best return on dollars spent.
Exit strategies using the secondary market remain an important part of the
private equity process. The secondary
market panel—moderated by Stephen H.
Can, Credit Suisse Strategic Partners—
featured Edward Hortick, VCFA Group,
and Jerrold M. Newman, Willowridge

Incorporated. According to Hortick, the
secondary market is still a small part
(roughly 2% to 3%) of the total private
equity market but represents an important risk-management tool. He outlined
the advantages of using the secondary
market, such as realizing balance-sheet
optimization strategies, and the risk implications of various transaction structures.
Newman provided a detailed description
of the deal-making process, which has
historically been fairly labor-intensive for
both the buyer and seller. Finally, Can
talked about leverage. Secondary fund
investing is characterized by relatively thin
returns, and the addition of leverage
makes these returns vulnerable to delays
in sale and/or decreases in exit valuations.
In summary, Can stated that leverage on
leverage on leverage (that is, primary fund
leverage, secondary fund leverage, and
secondary limited-partner leverage) materially magnifies risk, return volatility,
and outcomes.
Globalization

More domestic fund managers are looking
at global investment opportunities. Susan
E. Boedy, Thunderbird School of Global
Management, moderated a panel on globalization, featuring Beverly Berman,
Advent International; John Crocker,
Citigroup; and David A. Posner, Calder
Capital Partners. Boedy noted that, among
emerging markets, Asia continues to
generate the highest overall level of private equity fundraising, although Latin
America and sub-Saharan Africa showed
the most dramatic growth in fundraising
in 2006. She listed a wide range of investment challenges and risks related to global
investing, including the lack of transparency, the need for an entrepreneurial
culture, economic instability, shareholder
protection concerns, restrictive labor
laws, and fragmented capital markets.
Crocker explained that buyout and
growth funds dominate in Asia, where
fundraising has been stimulated by expected rates of return much higher than
those available in the U.S. Berman discussed how attractive pricing and the
improving economic environment are
stimulating private equity investment
in Latin America. Posner reported that
buyouts in Europe have been vibrant,

while venture capital has been less successful. Russia is becoming a more receptive environment because of its good
economic indicators, the emergence of
a genuine middle class, and an expanding consumer market. Finally, Boedy
noted that growth opportunities in the
Middle East and Africa stem from increasing liquidity related to rising oil prices,
government privatization efforts, and rising numbers of high-net-worth individuals.
The changing world of alternative
investments

Alternative investments include private
equity, hedge funds, real estate, and
commodities. Robert J. Caruso,
Highbridge Capital Management, and
Faith Rosenfeld, Highbridge Principal
Strategies, analyzed the growing convergence (that is, the blurring of boundaries) between hedge funds and private
equity. Some hedge funds are pursuing
this convergence because they need a
place to deploy their growing fund assets.
Some private equity funds are pursuing
it because they want to realize gains in
a more timely fashion.
Caruso and Rosenfeld described this
convergence as a long-term, permanent
change. The highest-quality and largest
private equity and hedge funds will

Charles L. Evans, President; Daniel G. Sullivan,
Senior Vice President and Director of Research; Douglas
Evanoff, Vice President, financial studies; Jonas Fisher,
Economic Advisor and Team Leader, macroeconomic
policy research; Richard Porter, Vice President, payment
studies; Daniel Aaronson, Economic Advisor and
Team Leader, microeconomic policy research; William
Testa, Vice President, regional programs, and Economics
Editor; Helen O’D. Koshy, Kathryn Moran, and
Han Y. Choi, Editors; Rita Molloy and Julia Baker,
Production Editors.
Chicago Fed Letter is published monthly by the
Research Department of the Federal Reserve
Bank of Chicago. The views expressed are the
authors’ and are not necessarily those of the
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago or the Federal
Reserve System.
© 2007 Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
Chicago Fed Letter articles may be reproduced in
whole or in part, provided the articles are not
reproduced or distributed for commercial gain
and provided the source is appropriately credited.
Prior written permission must be obtained for
any other reproduction, distribution, republication, or creation of derivative works of Chicago Fed
Letter articles. To request permission, please contact
Helen Koshy, senior editor, at 312-322-5830 or
email Helen.Koshy@chi.frb.org. Chicago Fed
Letter and other Bank publications are available
on the Bank’s website at www.chicagofed.org.
ISSN 0895-0164

continue to pursue this strategy to create
larger alternative asset management
firms that will increasingly dominate
the market. Corporate governance
and internal processes—including the
ability to manage conflicts of interest
and potential compliance issues—will
be critical to their success.
The Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) has traditionally focused on U.S.
public companies; the registered investment companies, investment advisors,
and broker-dealers; and their U.S. investors and customers. However, globalization and the increasing integration
of financial markets have led the SEC
to consider many other players in the
capital markets. In his keynote speech,6
SEC Commissioner Paul S. Atkins addressed some of these new departures.
After a 2004 rule requiring registration
for hedge fund advisors was overturned
in the courts, the SEC has taken a different approach to unregistered funds.
1

Leverage refers to the use of debt to increase
the potential return on an investment.

2

The traditional “originate-and-hold” strategy
involved originating loans and holding them
on the balance sheet until they were repaid
or written off. The more recent “originateto-distribute” strategy allows banks to sell
loans (and the underlying risks) to final

First, the SEC is intensifying its cooperation with other regulators and supervisors on issues of systemic risk and
information collection. Second, it has
proposed rules raising the wealth threshold for investors in private pools of
capital. Third, the SEC has adopted a
rule to clarify that it can pursue fund
advisors for fraud.
A look back and a look ahead

Timothy G. Kelly, Adams Street Partners,
concluded the conference with a wideranging discussion touching on many
issues addressed by earlier speakers. His
talk covered the history of private equity
since the 1980s and was organized around
the contrasting mind-sets of “denial,”
“anger and resistance,” “exploration
and acceptance,” and “commitment.”
To put current developments in perspective, Kelly highlighted a number of major
differences between the current buyout
expansion and the earlier Internet and
telecom expansion, circa 2000. Positive
investors, such as pension funds, insurance
companies, and hedge funds.
3

A covenant is a promise in a debt agreement
that certain conditions will or will not be
met; the purpose is to protect the lender.

4

A secondary market is a market where an
investor purchases an asset from another
investor rather than from the original issuer.

aspects of the current situation include operating headroom provided by covenantlite debt, more-viable companies that can
respond to reduced funding by rationalizing expenses, and the availability of exit
strategies, including strategic buyers.
Based on these differences, he suggested
that, while private equity returns may
suffer in the short term, the buyout sector should be able to weather the storm.
He cited the following factors that could
make the storm significantly more difficult to weather: a prolonged capital markets dislocation, the tightening credit
market, overly expensive target firms,
the reemergence of strategic buyers, an
earnings slowdown, government regulation, and/or major industry losses.
At next year’s conference, it will be interesting to see how the private equity
industry has adapted to its dramatically
changed environment and whether risk
management has, in fact, kept pace
with rapid growth.
5

For more information, see Josh Lerner,
Antoinette Schoar, and Wan Wong, 2007
“Smart institutions, foolish choices?: The
limited partner performance puzzle,” Journal
of Finance, Vol. 62, No. 2, April, pp. 731–764.

6

This speech is available on the SEC’s website:
www.sec.gov/news/speech/2007/
spch080207psa.htm.