Invest Better in Colgate
I want to draw your attention to serious concerns regarding Colgate's endowment management. Since 2021, there have been no updates on endowment performance. In July 2025, Colgate removed 2021 performance data from its website. Instead, they now link to financial statements that are limited in scope and not easily accessible to the layperson, while promoting a misleading narrative about conservative management. This inadequate, obfuscated, and disingenuous reporting is alarming. We know from public sources Colgate's 10-year performance ranks 73rd of 119 $1B+ endowments. We can do much better.
In contrast, Wesleyan University—similar in size, goals, and investment strategy—has significantly outperformed Colgate, ranking 9th among the same 119 schools. Led by Ann Martin, who was recruited from Yale, a pioneer in endowment management, Wesleyan has added an additional $300 million to its endowment compared to Colgate's over the last decade (both had close to $800 million in 2014). With comparable fundraising efforts to Colgate, Wesleyan has effectively doubled its endowment, while Colgate has achieved only 63% growth, providing Wesleyan with greater operational flexibility.
Additionally, Martin’s professional staff maintains an up-to-date and informative website and publishes a comprehensive annual letter detailing performance. Wesleyan's commitment to transparency is impressive; they showcase 1, 3, 5, 10, and 15-year performance, as well as 1 and 10-year performance for all sub-asset classes, all against relevant benchmarks. They understand that Wesleyan alumni and donors are true stakeholders.
Meanwhile, Colgate risks falling further behind by adhering to a complex, expensive alternatives-heavy strategy without the necessary expertise. I believe we should advocate for a shift toward a passive indexing strategy, which has outperformed most endowments over the past decade.
Without changes, poor management will negatively impact everything: scholarships, faculty support, academic initiatives, athletics, and facilities. Let’s confront these issues together and ensure Colgate is positioned for long-term success!
Please join me in my call for better endowment management, disclosure and oversight by reviewing the information below and signing my PETITION.
$325 Million
Colgate
Wesleyan
Colgate
Wesleyan
ESSENTIAL INSIGHTS
-
Colgate’s average annual return of 7.4% over the past decade ranks 73rd out of 119 large endowments (those over $1 billion).
-
The endowment has significantly underperformed relative to an appropriate benchmark for at least a decade.
-
Colgate attributes its poor performance to downside protection, making false claims that a passive, public-equities-only indexing strategy—a fictitious approach no responsible person would advocate—would have led to declines of 40-50% during 2000-2002 and 2009, potentially causing "irreversible financial damage" to the endowment.
-
Colgate also claims, without any evidence, that lower returns are due to their desire to maximize risk-adjusted returns. They base this implicitly on the less-frequent price estimates of private assets.
-
Nearly 70% of the endowment is invested in alternative investments, managed by external firms.
-
Performance across alternatives managers varies widely, making it crucial to select the best managers and negotiate lower fees.
-
Alternative managers typically charge very high fees. Colgate does not disclose these fees, which are likely in the tens of millions each year. Poor endowment performance suggests the lack of a robust manager selection process and appropriate fee structures.
-
Communication and disclosure are minimal and misleading. Colgate has not disclosed endowment performance since 2021, nor has it revealed the members of the board's investment committee.
-
Many alternative managers sit on Colgate’s board, which may present conflicts of interest. For instance, it is unclear whether Colgate has invested in funds or partnerships associated with committee members.
-
There is no evidence of independent appraisals or oversight as claimed. The investment committee and CIO express confidence in their approach. In an email to me, the board chair echoed the CIO's talking points, many of which are unsupported misrepresentations.
-
The endowment’s reported value may be overstated, as the valuations of most private investments are merely estimates.
WHY I AM ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT
-
I have tried, unsuccessfully, to raise my concerns over a period of years, through the Development Office, CIO, President Casey, and the Board
-
I now believe only our collective voice can persuade Colgate to improve endowment practices
-
No matter how much you've given in the past, helping to improve endowment management could be the biggest financial impact you will ever have on Colgate
An alternative investment is a financial asset that doesn't fall into one of the conventional investment categories like stocks, bonds, and cash (or mutual funds so comprised). Alternative investments, laden with high management fees, include private equity, hedge funds, absolute return and real assets (e.g., real estate). They are privately held (not available to all investors) and may be valued by the investment manager that owns it (not by public markets or an independent pricing service). This valuation often relies on complex models, appraisals, or recent transaction data, and can be less frequent and more subjective than pricing for publicly traded assets.
WE ARE PETITIONING FOR
-
Disclosure of managers’ rankings in their respective markets, showing Colgate’s skill at hiring investment managers
-
Annual performance updates, including long-term performance ranking relative to an appropriate peer group ($1B+ peers) and benchmark
-
Disclosure of managers and their fees
-
Regular independent (non-CIO and Investment Committee) assessments of performance and benchmark
-
Course corrections when long-term performance is poor, potentially transitioning to an inexpensive, passive indexing strategy.
Please join me in asking for more transparency and accountability.