Researchers at the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Financial Research ("OFR") analyzed information gathered from Form PF and described trends in the activities of private equity funds and their controlled portfolio companies ("CPCs"). As stated in a recent SEC comment request, "Form PF is designed to facilitate the Financial Stability Oversight Council's ("FSOC") monitoring of systemic risk in the private fund industry and to assist FSOC in determining whether and how to deploy its regulatory tools with respect to nonbank financial companies." Investment advisers with greater than $150 million in private fund assets under management are required to provide information on Form PF, such as (i) the funds they advise, (ii) private fund assets under management, (iii) fund performance and (iv) the use of leverage.
The OFR researchers found:
- borrowing and leverage increased among certain CPCs from 2013 to 2016, which could signal a greater likelihood of default;
- some CPCs had significant short-term debt exposures, which "should continue to be monitored"; and
- investment in financial CPCs has shifted toward non-bank entities.
The analysis, published in the OFR Brief Series, stated that the views and opinions of the authors do not necessarily represent the views of the OFR or the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Commentary / Steven Lofchie
The report concludes as follows:
"Form PF is not a perfect tool for monitoring trends in the private equity industry. The data collection lacks a long history, and reporting errors persist. Still, the analysis in this brief illustrates that Form PF data can be useful for monitoring basic fund characteristics. . . ."
There is only so much that analysts can do with data that is both limited and flawed. The report itself contains some moderately informative background as to the state of the private equity industry. However, observations such as "if a company borrows more money, then it is more likely to default" do not really add much to the government's ability to understand financial markets or systemic risk.
The government would be better off scrapping Form PF and trying to understand why the process of creating it went so wrong. This is not intended as a criticism of the report's authors. It is just the reality of so-so in, so-so out.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.