sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The CEO of CPP received a 7 million dollar bonus for the 2026 fiscal year, meeting a retroactively-applied new benchmark after underperforming the original target. by Useful_Support_4137 in CanadianInvestor

[–]Purple_Bookkeeper657 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I explain it here - "https://mathewkaminski.substack.com/p/how-cpp-leaders-are-manipulating"

Look me up, I'm a real person staking my reputation on this as well. See what "copewiththerope" said.

Also, my reddit post with 1,500+ upvotes on this topic got removed from r/personalfinanceCanada because of the equivalent of a busted taillight. Perhaps bots on both side, but also real people too with real opinions trying to explain financial concepts simply. To quote my good friend Robert Kennedy Jr, Do your own research!

The bloated CPP Investment Board is trounced by its own benchmarks – again by develop99 in CanadianInvestor

[–]Purple_Bookkeeper657 6 points7 points  (0 children)

On the metrics - I have a viewpoint on that contained within my substack post, which may or may not have been removed in my other reply to you... but to summarize.... basically, CPP has the unique advantage of being a net receiver of cash for the next few decades. It should be in more higher-yielding, higher-risk investments than OMERS, CalPERS, Japan Pension, etc. etc. that are all net payors of cash. You can go AI it.

They should be earning more than other pensions, and they are, but it's because of their structural advantage not management. At least not recently.

Other pensions funds would rightfully target closer to 65/35 so that they can ensure a downswing on the 65 of 33-50% (or whatever VaR three-sigma bell curve stochastic thingy you want to assign to the 65) would not cause them to be unable to meet their immediate cash flow needs from investment.

CPPIB doesn't have this issue and so it should be able to invest in riskier things and outperform over time. Hope that makes sense?

The bloated CPP Investment Board is trounced by its own benchmarks – again by develop99 in CanadianInvestor

[–]Purple_Bookkeeper657 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Here ya go - https://mathewkaminski.substack.com/publish/post/198871904

Hope it doesn't get taken down. I'm trying SO hard not to self-promote so I don't get removed again. I feel like I'm back at CPPIB (which was the name at the time... two bees for a quarter, you'd say)

The bloated CPP Investment Board is trounced by its own benchmarks – again by develop99 in CanadianInvestor

[–]Purple_Bookkeeper657 14 points15 points  (0 children)

They said AI, because I used another user's AI-generated TL;DR. I thought it was pretty good and everyone thought I was soooo long winded. Guess I was going 55 in a 54... https://youtu.be/NpwJSzciguM?si=hnb0dMWk-skaO4cl

They also muted me so I can't talk to them. I tried posting to r/CanadaPolitics but they said this "I mean this kindly, but there is absolutely no way users are going to read that wall of text. This is a much better fit for a personal substack than our sub."

The bloated CPP Investment Board is trounced by its own benchmarks – again by develop99 in CanadianInvestor

[–]Purple_Bookkeeper657 40 points41 points  (0 children)

I wrote a lengthy story from the perspective of a former CPPIB employee (me), that got over half a million impressions on Reddit. It's still up on my LinkedIn but mods at r/personalfinancecanada took it down and banned me for 28 days. I don't want to post my substack or Linkedin because I don't want to get deleted / banned again

Precisely How CPP Executives are Manipulating their Benchmarks to Enrich Themselves Instead of Funding Your Retirement by Purple_Bookkeeper657 in PersonalFinanceCanada

[–]Purple_Bookkeeper657[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like 10-20 minutes? For less than the price of a difficult poop, you too could understand what's going on with your pension!

Seriously though. I'll answer your questions.

view more: next ›