Financial Services Wilshire Questions and Responses - RFP for Investment Consulting Services

Location:	Oklahoma
Posted:	Feb 21, 2026
Due:	Feb 27, 2026
Agency:	State of Oklahoma - Commissioners of the Land Office
Type of Government:	State & Local
Category:	R - Professional, Administrative and Management Support Services
Publication URL:	To access bid details, please log in.

Attachment Preview

Wilshire Questions

1. Does CLO have any liquidity restrictions? Other than the 60% equity exposure, are there

other constraints that limit exposure to higher-return assets? Are there any specific

constraints that prohibit the investment committee from investing in private markets?

What

led

the

current

investment

constraints?

Response: CLO staff regularly monitors cash flows to ensure sufficient liquidity is

maintained to meet operating needs and investment objectives. From a policy

standpoint, the primary structural constraint is a statutory maximum of 60% invested

in equity securities, with a corresponding minimum of 40% in non-equity investments.

Beyond this, there are no additional hard limits designed specifically to restrict

exposure to higher-return assets. Private investments are permitted, provided they

comply with applicable statutory requirements and are evaluated in light of factors such

as liquidity, investment term, and the source of funds. The current investment

constraints are driven by Oklahoma constitutional and statutory requirements, which

establish the framework within which the Committee and staff operate.

2. What is the reason the incumbent reports on gross of fee returns within performance

reports?

Response: The Investment Plan requires managers to report gross-of-fee returns to

ensure consistent and comparable evaluation against benchmarks at the manager level,

while overall fund performance and objectives are assessed net of fees elsewhere in the

Plan.

3. Is this RFP solely being issued for traditional assets advisory services, or for the entire

investment program (i.e. including private markets and alternatives)?

Response: The Investment Plan outlines two consultant roles—one for marketable

(traditional) securities and one for private and alternative investments—and this RFP is

intended to cover advisory services for the full investment program, including both

traditional assets and private/alternative strategies, consistent with the structure

described in the Plan.

4. When was the last time the Committee reviewed its asset allocation? Could you share the

most recent asset allocation review and the underlying assumptions? Can you share the

rationale behind the seemingly new target allocation to private equity and the Committee

intends this to be implemented (ex: program of direct GP commitments)?

wilshire.com | T +1 310 451 3051 | 1299 Ocean Ave, Ste 600, Santa Monica, CA 90401 USA

Response: The Committee conducts a formal asset allocation study at least every two

years, with interim evaluations performed annually, and monitors the allocation on an

ongoing basis throughout the year. The current target allocation includes private

investments at approximately 1% in the near term and 3% over the long term. This

reflects a measured, incremental approach to building exposure while maintaining

flexibility and liquidity within the overall portfolio. Private investments may be

implemented through external managers or manager-led opportunities, subject to

appropriate approvals. The intent under the Investment Plan is for private markets

exposure to remain modest and thoughtfully integrated into the broader portfolio,

rather than developed as a large, standalone program of direct GP commitments.

Please refer to the following for additional detail on asset allocation study and final

approved monthly performance report:

https://clo.ok.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025-12-31-CLO-Monthly-Report-Final.pdf

https://clo.ok.gov/wp-content/uploads/Asset-Allocation.pdf

5. Are there any particular reasons for the substantial allocation to preferred securities?

Response: The allocation to preferred securities is intended to support CLO’s objective

of providing current income to beneficiaries while still allowing for moderate long-term

growth; preferred investments align well with these income-focused goals and are

subject to explicit quality limits in the Investment Plan, including a cap of 30% of a

manager’s portfolio rated below investment grade at the time of purchase.

6. We noticed there is a 5% allocation to internal real estate. Are there any custom risk and

return assumptions used here, or does the CLO use RVK’s standard core real estate return

and risk expectations?

Response: The Investment Plan permits real property investments of up to 5% of total

assets and establishes a Plan-specific net performance objective requiring returns to

meet or exceed the most recent five-year average return of the Permanent Fund

(excluding real property); accordingly, risk and return expectations for internal real

estate are defined by the Plan itself rather than based on an external consultant’s

standard assumptions. The internal real estate portfolio is treated as a separate asset

class outside of the asset allocation for financial securities, and the Plan allows for either

an internal or external real estate investment consultant. CLO currently utilizes an

internal consultant for this function, and performance monitoring of internal real estate

is outside the required scope of the financial securities consultant. While RVK has

requested information to assist in benchmarking and performance review to support

the real estate consultant—which is appreciated—such involvement is not required

under the current structure.

wilshire.com | T +1 310 451 3051 | 1299 Ocean Ave, Ste 600, Santa Monica, CA 90401 USA

7. For every asset class, CLO’s investment plan lists a target net alpha expectation of 25 basis

points. Does the CLO view every part of the portfolio as equally efficient/inefficient? If not,

why are the alpha assumptions uniform across the portfolio?

Response: The Investment Plan establishes a uniform relative performance objective of

exceeding relevant allocation indices by 25 basis points net of fees over a market cycle

as a consistent governance and monitoring standard across the portfolio; this uniform

hurdle is not intended to suggest that all markets are equally efficient, but rather to

apply a common policy benchmark across asset classes.

8. What is the current manager fee of the portfolio – is it close to the 0.5% limit? Does the

0.5% manager fee target impact the CLO's decisions around active vs. passive management

and traditional vs. alternative investments?

Response: For fiscal year 2025, total investment manager fees were approximately $7.3

million. As of June 30, 2025, total investments were approximately $2.89 billion, so

current manager fees are well below the Investment Plan’s aggregate cap, which limits

total payments to the custodial bank and investment managers to no more than 0.5%

of market value as of the prior June 30. While the Plan does not dictate how the fee cap

should influence decisions between active and passive strategies or traditional and

alternative investments, the 0.5% limit serves as an overall cost discipline and is

considered as part of broader portfolio construction and governance decisions.

9. Aside from good governance practice, are there other reasons for holding this RFP? Are

there current investment issues or pain points with the incumbent provider that the CLO

would like to improve upon?

Response: The issuance of this RFP is driven by the Investment Plan’s requirement to

periodically review consultant services at least every five years, and it is not being

issued in response to specific investment issues or performance concerns with the

incumbent provider.

10.To what extent do internal team bandwidth in handling paperwork impede the CLO from

considering a greater allocation to private markets?

Response: Any potential expansion of private market exposure, including

considerations related to internal staffing capacity and administrative workload, would

ultimately need to be evaluated and discussed with the Commissioners within the

framework established by the Investment Plan.

11. Is there any internal expense levy? If so, could you share what it is?

Response: The Investment Plan does not identify a general internal expense levy;

instead, it specifies approved funding sources for expenses, including realized

investment gains and, beginning July 1, 2026, rental income for real estate investments.

wilshire.com | T +1 310 451 3051 | 1299 Ocean Ave, Ste 600, Santa Monica, CA 90401 USA

12. Is the CLO looking for a consultant who can help with the valuation / due diligence work

of investible opportunities in Oklahoma?

Response: Yes, the Investment Plan contemplates that consultants will support

analysis, due diligence, recommendations, and ongoing monitoring for both marketable

and private investments, including opportunities aligned with the Invest in Oklahoma

Act, consistent with the Plan’s guidelines and statutory requirements.

wilshire.com | T +1 310 451 3051 | 1299 Ocean Ave, Ste 600, Santa Monica, CA 90401 USA

This is the opportunity summary page. It provides an overview of this opportunity and a preview of the attached documentation.