So, I did a post:
There was a reference to PSERS, which we do have a thread on here:
[and yes, I used my links here to remind me a bit]
As far as I can tell, there’s nothing particularly special about IPERS, other than they may have screwed up in getting someone who is an outsider to the public pensions sphere to come in as a risk officer (whupsie, won’t play along!) … as opposed to the shit show that happened with Calpers management (hmmmm).
And I can remind people what happened there, if you’d like.
Many public pensions are hiding the fees they are paying to public equity, etc.
I haven’t done a deep dive on the IPERS allocation to alternatives, and perhaps they’re leveraged more than I can see, but they’re only a little higher than the median allocation as far as I can tell.
That doesn’t mean it’s great… it’s that a bunch of public pension plans have greatly increased their allocations to alts post-GFC to chase yield, and it’s only been going up up up. The specifics where the CEO & other top brass of IPERS may have been goosing the numbers to hit targets (and a dumbass metric that was a glorified tracking error) may have been their particular downfall, but hiding private equity/asset management fees on the alts is par for the course for many of the public pension funds.