Vendor Ratings
Goldman Sachs Asset Management17 Responses
Overall Offering
| Average Score | 4.63 (-4.1% from 2015) |
| 5 = Extremely satisfied | 63% |
| 4 | 38% |
| 3 | 0% |
| 2 | 0% |
| 1 = Unsatisfied | 0% |
Average scores by category
| Responsiveness to general inquiries | 4.82 |
| Timely performance reporting | 4.53 |
| New ideas and solutions | 4.59 |
| Knowledge sharing | 4.71 |
| Accessibility to investment team | 4.88 |
| Funded-status attribution | 4.86 |
How/why GSAM was selected
| Existing relationship | 86% |
| Consultant recommendation | 21% |
| Board/staff due diligence | 36% |
| Complements another provider | 0% |
The sophomore effort of GSAM sees scores slightly dip, but the outcome remains the same: The firm tops the survey again for overall LDI offering (tying newcomer Fidelity) and besting survey mainstays PIMCO and NISA. Nearly two-thirds of GSAM’s respondents are “extremely satisfied,” helping to propel it to the top of nearly every rating category, including “funded status attribution,” which eluded it last year. Its score there (4.86 out of 5) is ahead by a wide margin—Fidelity comes in next with a 4.13. GSAM may want to reverse the downward trajectory of its reporting score, but at 4.53 any criticism feels like small beer.