A side-by-side comparison of Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and State of Wisconsin Investment Board (SWIB) across firm type, scale, strategy, and geography.
Canada Pension Plan Investment Board manages roughly 4.0× the assets of the other firm.
Both firms are active in 1 shared asset class out of 4 tracked between them.
| Canada Pension Plan Investment Board | State of Wisconsin Investment Board (SWIB) | |
|---|---|---|
| Basics | ||
| Firm type | Public Pension Fund | Public Pension Fund |
| Country | Canada | USA - WI |
| Founded | 1997 | 1951 |
| Firm age | 29 yrs | 75 yrs |
| Roles | Lp | Lp |
| Scale & AUM | ||
| AUM | CAD 714.43B | $178B |
| Market position | Mega ($500B+) | Giant ($100–500B) |
| AUM ratio | 4.0× larger | |
| Strategy & Focus | ||
| Investment style | Multi-asset | Multi-asset |
| Diversification | Broad | Diversified |
Canada Pension Plan Investment Board is a public pension fund based in Canada, while State of Wisconsin Investment Board (SWIB) is a public pension fund based in USA - WI. This page compares their firm type, assets under management, strategies, and geographic focus.
By reported AUM, Canada Pension Plan Investment Board is larger (CAD 714.43B vs $178B).
| Strategies |
| 20 — Buyout, Growth Equity, Co-investment, Secondaries (LP-led) |
| Asset classes | private equity, real estate, infrastructure, fixed income, private credit, secondaries | private equity, private credit, real estate, fixed income |
| Shared asset classes | 4: private equity, real estate, fixed income, private credit |
| Geography | ||
| Geographic bias | Canada | Global |
| Regions | Canada, United States, India, Japan | North America, Global, Global, Global |
| Team | ||
| Total contacts | 80 | 0 |
| Team-to-AUM ratio | 0.1 per $B | 0.0 per $B |
| Network & Relationships | ||
| Connectivity | 63/100 | 0/100 |
| Network strength | 31/100 | 0/100 |
| Relationships | 25 | 0 |
| Relationship density | High | None |
| Network maturity | Emerging | No network |
| Similarity | ||
| Overall similarity | 25% | |
| Asset class overlap | 67% | |
