MPF Ratings’ (MPFR) ratings methodology is designed to reflect each scheme’s “Value for Money”. The best “Value for Money” schemes receive MPFR’s GOLD rating. Schemes that offer good value or average value receive SILVER and BRONZE ratings respectively.
In understanding the “Value for Money” proposition MPFR believe that the best value for money schemes offer greater potential to maximise the retirement savings of its members in a well serviced, secure environment while offering suitable service, education, and employer and member administration benefits in line with today’s competitive environment.
It is important to understand that a lower scheme rating (such as BRONZE) does not necessarily indicate that a scheme is unsuitable. Rather, ratings indicate that the same or similar features offered by these schemes may well be available in a more efficient environment.
MPF Ratings undertakes a comprehensive analysis of all MPF schemes, covering in excess of HK$905 billion* in savings on behalf of over 2.8 million active workers*.
In order to maintain integrity within the rating process, the range of MPF Ratings is determined in accordance with our practice of distributing all results across a predetermined distribution curve while excising a degree of discretion where appropriate:
Gold (approx. 20% of Schemes)
Silver (approx. 30% of Schemes)
Bronze (approx. 50% of Schemes)
* Based on September 2019’s Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Statistical Digest. Source: MPFA
A best value for money MPF scheme that is well balanced across all key assessment criteria
A good value for money MPF scheme that is well regarded across most key assessment criteria
A fair value for money MPF scheme that is well regarded across only some key assessment criteria
MPF Ratings’ ratings methodology seeks to comprehensively cover an MPF scheme’s offering. The data assessed covers information both in the public domain as well as aspects which are sourced directly from schemes. Our ratings system covers three main assessment components; Investment, Fees and Charges, and an assessment of overall services within the schemes. These are reviewed both quantitatively and qualitatively and are individually weighted. Each rated scheme is provided with a Request for Information documents from MPF Ratings to maintain our data. Where a scheme does not respond, or the data provided cannot be substantiated, then the response used will (where appropriate) be assumed to be at the lower half of our universe. Details of the assessment modules and their weightings are as follows:
Investment (1 year, 3 years and 5 years) – including, but not limited to, fund structures and performance (absolute and risk adjusted)
(Full year) – including, but not limited to, governance and transparency, account administration efficiency, customer service standards, services to employers and members, use of technology, and member education and communication
The calendar years are used as period for assessment. Should you require further information on MPF Ratings’ assessment methodology, please contact us.
MPF Ratings Limited
The assessment we make of schemes and their subsequent rating is of a general nature only and is prepared without taking into account any reader’s objectives, financial situation or needs. The information is not guaranteed to be accurate or complete. Because of this you should, before acting on the information, consider its appropriateness to your own financial objectives, situation and needs and you may wish to obtain personal financial advice on the matter from a financial adviser. Before you make a decision regarding any product discussed in this report you should obtain and consider a copy of the relevant Principle Brochure or Offering Brochure from the product issuer.