Under TPA, an investor's job is no longer to fill asset class buckets. Instead, it's to generate knowledge on how any potential investment—be it a manager, ETF, or direct deal—adds value to the overall portfolio's objectives, forcing an apples-to-apples comparison of all opportunities.
Temasek evaluates global investments on two fronts: financial returns and the strategic insights they generate. This "network effect" allows them to transfer knowledge from one portfolio company to others, enhancing value across their entire ecosystem and justifying investments beyond pure financial metrics.
WCM realized their portfolio became too correlated because their research pipeline itself was the root cause, with analysts naturally chasing what was working. To fix this, they built custom company categorization tools to force diversification at the idea generation stage, ensuring a broader set of opportunities is always available.
The goal isn't to know everything about an industry, which has diminishing returns and leads to overconfidence. A better edge comes from efficiently understanding the few critical variables that matter most across multiple opportunities, while consciously ignoring immaterial details.
Contrary to common belief, the Total Portfolio Approach (TPA) isn't about nimble trading. It's a framework that uses data to understand the risk of any investment relative to a simple reference portfolio (e.g., 70/30). This allows allocators to fund compelling opportunities flexibly, freed from rigid, pre-defined asset class silos.
A pure TPA system can alienate specialists hired for specific asset classes. A hybrid model, where a portion of capital is allocated to traditional buckets, allows organizations to retain deep expertise in areas like private equity while still gaining the benefits of a holistic TPA overlay on the rest.
The Total Portfolio Approach (TPA) requires a fundamental shift in how an investment organization sees itself. It's not a technical asset allocation change but a cultural transformation that aligns every decision—people, capabilities, risk, and liquidity—with the fund's ultimate goals, moving beyond simple portfolio construction.
Investor Mark Ein argues against sector-specific focus, viewing his broad portfolio (prop tech, sports, etc.) as a key advantage. It enables him to transfer insights and best practices from one industry to another, uncovering opportunities that specialists might miss.
Instead of focusing on process, allocators should first ask managers fundamental questions like "What do you believe?" and "Why does this work?" to uncover their core investment philosophy. This simple test filters out the majority of firms that lack a deeply held, clearly articulated conviction about their edge.
Shifting capital between asset classes based on relative value is powerful but operationally difficult. It demands a "coordination tax"—a significant organizational effort to ensure different teams price risk comparably and collaborate. This runs counter to the industry's typical siloed, product-focused structure.
In a world of high valuations and compressed returns, LPs can no longer be passive allocators. They must build capabilities for real-time portfolio management, actively buying and selling fund positions based on data-driven views of relative value and liquidity. This active management is a new source of LP alpha.