Netherlands Holds Best Retirement System in the World for Another Year

Iceland and Denmark retained their spots near the top of the Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index, although the report noted the global need for retirement reform amidst falling birthrates and increasing longevity.

Which countries have the best retirement systems in the world? The Netherlands, Iceland and Denmark have the top three systems, according to the 2024 Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index. The top three were unchanged from last year’s report.

The 16th annual survey benchmarked and compared the retirement systems of 46 countries, with a secondary purpose of highlighting shortcomings in each system and suggesting areas of reform.

Each country was scored according to three metrics:

Adequacy (40% weight): system design, government support, home ownership, savings, growth assets and benefits;

Sustainability (35% weight): government debt, public expenditure, demography, economic growth and pension coverage; and

Integrity (25% weight): regulation, communication, protection, governance and operating costs.

The Netherlands had the highest overall score (84.8) and the highest adequacy score (86.3). Iceland, No. 2 on the list, had a total score of 83.4 and the highest sustainability score of 84.3. Denmark, ranked third, had a total score of 81.6. Finland, with a score of 75.9, had the highest integrity score at 90.8.

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news. 

The United States ranked 29th out of 46 with a total score of 60.4, an adequacy score of 63.9, a sustainability score of 58.4 and an integrity score of 57.5.

According to the report, increasing longevity, higher interest rates and the rising costs of care are putting pressure on governments to support pension systems. As a result, several countries have slightly lower scores than in previous years.

“In a world where fertility rates are falling and life expectancy is rising, retirement income systems are center stage,” said Pat Tomlinson, president and CEO of Mercer, in a statement. “Ensuring strong alignment in private and public retirement income arrangements, increasing employee coverage and encouraging higher labor force participation for those who wish to work at older ages are just a few ways to improve long-term outcomes for retirees.”

Rankings

The rankings were based on total index value. Grade A systems had an index value of greater than 80, B+ systems had an index value ranging from 75 through 80, B systems from 65 through 75, C+ systems from 60 through 65, C systems from 50 through 60 and D systems from 35 through 50. E systems were those with an index value less than 35, although no countries scored so low.

Of the countries considered, only the Netherlands, Iceland, Denmark and Israel had a grade of A, which Mercer and the CFA Institute described as first-class and robust retirement systems that deliver good benefits, are sustainable and have a high level of integrity.

Singapore (78.7), Australia (76.7), Finland (75.9) and Norway (75.2) earned B+ scores. Chile (74.9), Sweden (74.3), the U.K. (71.6), Switzerland (71.5), New Zealand (68.7), Mexico (68.5), France (68) and Germany (67.3) were among the countries that received scores of B. B+ and B countries have retirement systems that have a sound structure and “many good features” but have room for areas of improvement that differentiate them from an A-grade system

The UAE (64.8), Kazakhstan (64), Hong Kong (63.9), Colombia (63), Saudia Arabia (60.5) the U.S. (60.4) and Spain (63.3) had C+ grades. Poland (56.8), China (56.5), Malaysia (56.3), Brazil (55.8) and Japan (54.9) were among the countries with a C grade. C+ and C countries were described as countries in which the retirement systems have some good features, but also some major risks or shortcomings that need to be addressed.

South Africa (49.6), Turkey (48.3), Argentina (45.5), the Philippines (45.8) and India (44) received D grades as countries with systems that have some desirable features, but also major weaknesses and omissions that need to be addressed.

From DB to DC

The global pension landscape is changing, as more and more countries and plans shift to defined contribution plans from defined benefit plans, noted Margaret Franklin, president and CEO of the CFA Institute, in the report.

The Netherlands, for example, is in the process of transferring its entire retirement system from defined benefit plans to defined contribution plans by 2028 as part of the Netherlands’ Future Pension Act.

“The ongoing shift to defined contribution pension plans introduces many financial planning challenges, which are falling squarely on the shoulders of tomorrow’s retirees,” Franklin wrote in the report. “DC plans require individuals to make complex financial planning decisions that may significantly impact their financial circumstances, and yet many individuals are not well prepared to manage the required decisions. The Index serves as an important reminder of the gaps that remain in providing long-term financial security and advice for individuals.”

As people live longer and as birthrates decline, numerous countries and plans are shifting toward defined contribution plans which put the burden of risk on retirees. Franklin wrote that pension funds must evolve to provide a range of options and support to help individuals achieve the best possible retirement outcomes.

“Significant retirement income system reforms are needed to meet the financial needs of retirees and their evolving work expectations,” said David Knox, an Australia-based senior partner in Mercer. “There is no single solution to getting retirement systems onto more solid ground. Now is the time for governments, policymakers, the pension industry and employers to work together to ensure that older populations are treated with dignity and can maintain a lifestyle similar to what they experienced through their working years.”

Working Past 65 Redefines Portfolios and Retirement

China to Raise Retirement Age, Starting in 2025

Tags: CFA Institute, David Knox, Margaret Franklin, MCGPI, Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index, Netherlands

Approximately two-thirds of active bond funds beat their average passive category peers during the 12-month period ending June 30, leading all category groups in Morningstar’s most recent Active/Passive Barometer report.

The semiannual report, which measures the performance of active and passive funds in their respective Morningstar categories, covers more than 8,000 separate funds with a total of approximately $21 trillion in assets as of the end of the first half of 2024.

In particular, intermediate core bond funds were the top performers among active bond funds, outperforming their passive counterparts 72% of the time during the period. The funds, which typically carry more credit risk and have shorter durations than indexed offerings, benefitted from narrowing credit spreads and persistent inflation that kept interest-rate cuts at bay, according to the report. However, the category did not perform as well over the long term, as intermediate core bond funds outperformed their passive peers over the last 10 and 15 years only 45.5% and 15.9% of the time, respectively.

Actively managed real estate funds outperformed their passive peers 66% of the time during the 12-month period, with U.S. real estate funds and global real estate funds outperforming their peers 68.8% and 62.2% of the time, respectively. However, over the past 10 years, active global real estate funds outperformed their passive peers 54.5% of the time, compared with 50% of the time for U.S. real estate funds. The report noted that active success rates in the global real estate category fluctuate dramatically over short time horizons due to the diversity of funds it includes.

For more stories like this, sign up for the CIO Alert newsletter. 

“Disparate returns between domestic and foreign real estate securities can whipsaw active managers’ relative results,” according to the report. “That explains how in 2023, active global real estate funds boosted their winning percentage to 71% from 20% in the year prior.”

Meanwhile, actively managed mutual funds or exchange-traded funds edged out their passive peers over the 12-month period, with 51% topping the average passive fund in their Morningstar category, up from 47% one year earlier. Morningstar’s report stated that “it was basically a coin flip whether an actively managed mutual fund or exchange-traded fund outperformed its average passive peer from July 2023 through June 2024.”

Active global or foreign-stock portfolios beat their typical passive peer about 43% of the time during the period, down from 57% from the same period a year earlier.

“Global- and foreign-stock categories have been kinder to active managers than U.S. markets,” the report stated. “Roughly three out of 10 active foreign-stock managers succeeded over the past 15 years, while just two out of 10 in the U.S. could say the same.”