• Subscribe
  • Log in
  • search icon

Global Pension Transparency Benchmark

Promoting transparency for better pension outcomes

Why Transparency Matters

The Global Pension Transparency Benchmark is a world first global standard for pension disclosure, bringing a focus to transparency in a bid to improve pension outcomes for members.

The GPTB ranks 15 countries on public disclosures of key value-generation elements for the five largest pension fund organisations within each country. The GPTB focuses on the transparency and quality of public disclosures with quality relating to the completeness, clarity, information value and comparability of disclosures.

The overall country and fund scores look at four factors: governance and organisation; performance; costs; and responsible investing, which are measured by assessing hundreds of underlying components.

Countries Analysed

Funds Reviewed

Questions Asked

Data Points Analysed

There is plenty of evidence that a lack of transparency has negative consequences for relationships and organisations of all types, whether they be individuals, governments, corporations, or pension funds. Being transparent is the right thing to do, but there are many benefits beyond this simple moral imperative:

  • Transparency and accountability go hand in hand and lead to improved decision making
  • Improved relationships and interactions across a broad spectrum of stakeholders including beneficiaries, plan sponsors, regulators, suppliers and concerned citizens
  • Ultimately, better outcomes through clarity of purpose, sound goals and accountability for progress
This new benchmark reframes the transparency narrative from a narrow and negative focus on costs to a more holistic and positive concept of transparency and includes governance and strategy, value generation and sustainability. Top1000funds.com and CEM Benchmarking have long had aligned goals – to highlight industry best practice and drive better pension outcomes globally. The development of this benchmark is in line with those goals.

“A lack of transparency results in distrust and a deep sense of insecurity.” Dalai Lama

Select the year below to review the results from the current and previous GPTB projects.
You can also hover over countries, factors and methodology on the navigation bar to see the full results from the previous year.

Overall Findings 2023

The third edition of the Global Pension Transparency Benchmark reveals that increased scrutiny on public disclosures is driving measurable improvements. More than three-quarters (77%) of the reviewed organisations improved their total transparency scores. The average fund scored 60 out of 100, an improvement of five points relative to the last edition of the transparency benchmark. Four of the five transparency leaders increased their transparency the most: some have publicly declared their intent to be the most transparent pension organisations in the world.

It is great that the Global Pension Transparency Benchmark is driving organisations globally to improve their transparency.

Canadian funds finished first among the countries reviewed, with all five Canadian funds finishing within the top 10 funds globally. The Dutch funds also deserve an honourable mention. Collectively, they provided the best disclosures on cost and responsible investing.

CPP Investments topped the list of the most transparent funds in the last two editions of this benchmark. This year, they were narrowly beat out by the Government Pension Fund Global of Norway, and now form a competitive top three with the first three funds separated by only one point each. Australian Super rounds out the top three.

In the last edition of the benchmark, transparency scores for individual funds were published for the first time. This created more discussion. This year, we wanted to provide funds with more transparency on the review process. The process itself continues to improve as the benchmark matures. This year, additional governance was introduced, highlighted by a new appeals process for funds to dispute results.

Some of the improvements in this year’s transparency scores are driven by better processes and governance. Most of the improvements are driven by better disclosures.

While performance reporting at the fund level is generally well done, asset class level disclosures continue to disappoint.

More funds are quantifying their progress and goals around carbon footprint and other areas of responsible investing.

Stand alone reports on responsible investing are becoming more common, enabling funds to tell a cohesive story.

Cost disclosures continue to vary considerably by country and show a strong correlation to domestic disclosure standards.

Overall Findings 2022

This second iteration of the Global Pension Transparency Benchmark continues to reveal the need for improvement in pension transparency across the globe. Given the slow evolutionary nature of the pension industry in general, this is not an entirely surprising result.

It was heartening to see that progress is being made in some areas, particularly in respect to responsible investing, but also in governance disclosures.

The improvements seen in disclosures around responsible investing mean that this factor is no longer the lowest scoring factor. Improvements in governance disclosures mean that factor is now the highest scoring factor overall, followed by performance (the highest scoring factor in last year’s review), with cost being the lowest scoring factor.

For responsible investing, the improvements were most common among funds who were disclosing some, but not a lot of information last year. While some top scoring funds did improve on the margins, it was those funds in the middle of the rankings that showed the biggest improvement. Lamentably there was no improvement among the lowest scoring funds, 21 of which still received a score of 20 or below. 

Governance scores reflected an increase in funds disclosing information about their operations as a whole, disclosing important corporate information beyond their core mission of managing assets. There was more discussion of enterprise-wide initiatives and goals, as well as increased discussion on internal compensation philosophies and diversity programs.  

These two areas of improvement were often related. It seems that as pension organisations disclose more on how they steward portfolio companies, they are becoming aware that information of importance to them in this regard could similarly be of importance to their own stakeholders in relation to the fund itself.

While performance reporting at the fund level is generally well done, asset class level disclosures continue to disappoint.

More funds are quantifying their progress and goals around carbon footprint and other areas of responsible investing.

Stand alone reports on responsible investing are becoming more common, enabling funds to tell a cohesive story.

Cost disclosures continue to vary considerably by country and show a strong correlation to domestic disclosure standards.

Overall Findings 2021

The Global Pension Transparency Benchmark has revealed the need for serious improvement in pension transparency across the globe.

Overall the transparency of disclosure varies greatly, both between countries and between funds, across factors that were measured. In some instances there are wild variances between the best and worst performers.

While some countries and funds scored well on certain factors, on average transparency of disclosure needs improvement. Overall pension funds around the world scored best on performance disclosure, followed by governance, cost and responsible investment. But the average scores were low, with only the performance factor score demonstrating above average results (average country score of 68). 

Transparency was best on the performance factor

Reporting around responsible investing lacks clarity and consistency

Within each factor there was a standout country

Cost factor disclosures varied considerably

Overall Results 2023

Country Results

Country Overall Min Avg Max Overall Ranking Average Score (over) Min - Max (over) Cost Min Avg Max Cost Ranking Average Score (cost) Min - Max (cost) Governance Min Avg Max Governance Ranking Average Ranking (gov) Min - Max (gov) Performance Min Avg Max Performance Ranking Average Score (perf) Min - Max (perf) Responsible Investing Min Avg Max Responsible Investing Ranking Average Score (RI) Min - Max (RI)
Australia 63 74 87 3 74 63 - 87 55 65 69 3 65 55 - 69 87 93 100 2 93 87 - 100 64 77 90 3 77 64 - 90 53 68 85 8 68 53 - 85
Brazil 42 48 56 12 48 42 - 56 45 52 58 9 52 45 - 58 42 60 72 11 60 42 - 72 43 59 66 11 0 43 - 66 15 28 46 14 28 15 - 46
Canada 81 83 88 1 83 81 - 88 64 71 90 2 71 64 - 90 95 98 100 1 98 95 - 100 85 89 92 1 89 85 - 92 81 85 88 2 85 81 - 88
Chile 39 47 53 13 47 39 - 53 45 54 59 8 54 45 - 59 57 64 71 10 64 57 - 71 39 50 59 14 50 39 - 59 11 26 44 15 26 11 - 44
Denmark 54 61 67 7 61 54 - 67 24 39 57 13 39 24 - 57 71 83 95 4 83 71 - 95 41 54 68 13 54 41 - 68 70 76 84 5 76 70 - 84
Finland 46 59 64 8 59 46 - 64 14 26 39 14 26 14 - 39 58 76 87 6 76 58 - 87 60 63 67 8 63 60 - 67 57 79 93 4 79 57 - 93
Japan 35 46 66 14 46 35 - 66 29 40 54 12 40 29 - 54 39 49 64 14 49 39 - 64 51 67 85 5 67 51 - 85 12 34 73 11 34 12 - 73
Mexico 11 30 40 15 30 11 - 40 7 15 20 15 15 7 - 20 11 45 73 15 45 11 - 73 21 32 49 15 32 21 - 49 3 32 77 13 32 3 - 77
Netherlands 72 75 81 2 75 72 - 81 73 80 93 1 80 73 - 93 67 73 77 8 73 67 - 77 60 66 75 6 66 60 - 75 84 89 94 1 89 84 - 94
Norway 40 59 89 8 59 40 - 89 15 45 91 11 45 15 - 91 39 71 89 9 71 39 - 89 33 62 95 9 62 33 - 95 48 69 94 7 69 48 - 94
South Africa 43 55 63 11 55 43 - 63 40 46 50 10 46 40 - 50 59 76 89 6 76 59 - 89 45 64 82 7 64 45 - 82 3 33 54 12 33 3 - 54
Sweden 67 72 78 4 72 67 - 78 50 58 64 5 58 50 - 64 79 87 92 3 87 79 - 92 60 68 82 4 68 60 - 82 73 82 90 3 82 73 - 90
Switzerland 51 58 74 10 58 51 - 74 54 60 73 4 60 54 - 73 47 60 84 11 60 47 - 84 49 61 77 10 61 49 - 77 42 60 73 9 60 42 - 73
United Kingdom 53 64 78 5 64 53 - 78 42 57 77 6 57 42 - 77 60 79 96 5 79 60 - 96 51 59 70 11 59 51 - 70 51 71 85 6 71 51 - 85
United States 38 62 83 6 62 38 - 83 41 56 79 7 56 41 - 79 30 56 93 13 56 30 - 93 80 87 93 2 87 80 - 93 0 55 82 10 55 0 - 82
  • Assessments were conducted between January 23 and May 5, 2023
  • Where the scores are the same, a joint ranking has been awarded listed alphabetically

Year-on-Year Comparisons

Fund Results

  • Assessments were conducted between January 23 and May 5, 2023
  • Where the scores are the same, a joint ranking has been awarded listed alphabetically

Factor results

View data, rankings and analysis of each factors (cost, governance, performance and responsible investment)

Country results

View data, rankings and analysis of the 15 countries and underlying pension funds

Fund results

View data, rankings and analysis of the pension funds

Overall Results 2022

Country Results

Country Performance Min Avg Max Performance Ranking Average Score (perf) Min - Max (perf) Cost Min Avg Max Cost Ranking Average Score (cost) Min - Max (cost) Governance Min Avg Max Governance Ranking Average Ranking (gov) Min - Max (gov) Responsible Investing Min Avg Max Responsible Investing Ranking Average Score (RI) Min - Max (RI) Overall Min Avg Max Overall Ranking Average Score (over) Min - Max (over)
Australia 60 71 79 4 71 60 - 79 31 53 65 7 53 31 - 65 80 86 95 2 86 80 - 95 20 55 78 8 55 20 - 78 49 64 73 4 64 49 - 73 10
Brazil 27 43 69 15 43 27 - 69 40 49 58 8 49 40 - 58 40 51 60 13 51 40 - 60 3 23 46 13 23 3 - 46 30 40 56 13 40 30 - 56
Canada 68 81 87 2 81 68 - 87 49 64 81 3 64 49 - 81 92 94 97 1 94 92 - 97 59 70 77 3 70 59 - 77 71 75 81 1 75 71 - 81
Chile 36 55 69 13 55 36 - 69 47 56 63 4 56 47 - 63 46 60 72 10 60 46 - 72 5 11 20 15 11 5 - 20 34 45 54 12 45 34 - 54
Denmark 38 56 70 12 56 38 - 70 20 45 65 9 45 20 - 65 69 78 93 4 78 69 - 93 65 68 74 4 68 65 - 74 52 60 67 5 60 52 - 67
Finland 45 62 70 6 62 45 - 70 21 27 43 14 27 21 - 43 49 73 87 6 73 49 - 87 14 67 88 5 67 14 - 88 31 55 65 8 55 31 - 65
Japan 35 56 83 11 56 35 - 83 26 36 54 13 36 26 - 54 32 46 63 14 46 32 - 63 0 23 67 12 23 0 - 67 23 39 62 14 39 23 - 62
Mexico 49 53 59 14 53 49 - 59 6 10 14 15 10 6 - 14 6 34 70 15 34 6 - 70 0 12 39 14 12 0 - 39 15 26 35 15 26 15 - 35
Netherlands 59 65 73 5 65 59 - 73 71 77 89 1 77 71 - 89 54 66 78 8 66 54 - 78 62 77 83 1 77 62 - 83 65 69 74 2 69 65 - 74
Norway 34 58 82 9 58 34 - 82 19 44 78 10 44 19 - 78 35 65 83 9 65 35 - 83 38 59 79 7 59 38 - 79 39 55 75 9 55 39 - 75
South Africa 55 62 79 7 62 55 - 79 36 42 51 12 42 36 - 51 49 68 84 7 68 49 - 84 17 47 67 9 47 17 - 67 49 56 64 7 56 49 - 64
Sweden 67 71 75 4 71 67 - 75 35 54 66 5 54 35 - 66 77 81 87 3 81 77 - 87 67 76 88 2 76 67 - 88 62 68 74 3 68 62 - 74
Switzerland 45 61 77 8 61 45 - 77 57 65 79 2 65 57 - 79 30 54 82 12 54 30 - 82 20 40 55 11 40 20 - 55 44 53 68 11 53 44 - 68
United Kingdom 52 57 66 10 57 52 - 66 32 53 74 6 53 32 - 74 57 73 90 5 73 57 - 90 33 60 75 6 60 33 - 75 48 59 70 6 59 48 - 70
United States 66 84 94 1 84 66 - 94 4 43 68 11 43 4 - 68 35 54 71 11 54 35 - 71 0 43 71 10 43 0 - 71 35 54 72 10 54 35 - 72

Year-on-Year Comparisons

Fund Results

  • The fund assessments were conducted between August 1 -December 31, 2021
  • Where the scores are the same, a joint ranking has been awarded listed alphabetically

*At the time of the review, QSuper was a standalone fund. It has since merged with Sunsuper to create Australian Retirement Trust.

Factor results

View data, rankings and analysis of each factors (cost, governance, performance and responsible investment)

Country results

View data, rankings and analysis of the 15 countries and underlying pension funds

Fund results

View data, rankings and analysis of the pension funds

Overall Results 2021

Country Performance Min Avg Max Performance Ranking Average Score (perf) Min - Max (perf) Cost Min Avg Max Cost Ranking Average Score (cost) Min - Max (cost) Governance Min Avg Max Governance Ranking Average Ranking (gov) Min - Max (gov) Responsible Investing Min Avg Max Responsible Investing Ranking Average Score (RI) Min - Max (RI) Overall Min Avg Max Overall Ranking Average Score (over) Min - Max (over)
Australia 66 76 86 4 76 66 - 86 58 67 84 3 67 58. - 84 65 72 80 2 72 65 - 80 8 46 70 46 8 - 70 50 65 79 8 65 50 - 79 10
Brazil 35 51 67 15 51 35 - 67 38 57 70 6 57 38 - 70 40 43 45 12 43 40 - 45 8 19 27 19 8 - 27 34 43 52 13 43 34 - 52
Canada 75 84 90 2 84 75 - 90 59 69 83 2 69 59 - 83 72 86 97 1 86 72 - 97 47 58 66 58 47 - 66 69 74 82 5 74 69 - 82
Chile 52 59 70 13 59 52 - 70 25 39 51 12 39 25 - 51 38 51 63 9 51 38 - 63 2 6 11 6 2 - 11 30 38 42 14 38 30 - 42
Denmark 51 61 70 12 61 51 - 70 41 51 59 8 51 41 - 59 47 63 91 4 63 47 - 91 46 61 74 61 46 - 74 55 59 68 3 59 55. - 68
Finland 64 69 77 7 69 64 - 77 18 28 31 14 28 18 - 31 38 57 71 7 57 38 - 71 13 58 81 58 13 - 81 33 53 63 4 53 33 - 63
Japan 47 69 86 8 69 47 - 86 30 38 46 13 38 30 - 46 18 28 41 14 28 18 - 41 0 20 40 20 0 - 40 24 39 48 12 39 24 - 48
Mexico 50 55 67 14 55 50 - 67 19 23 26 15 23 19 - 26 0 17 42 15 17 0 - 42 0 2 5 2 0 - 5 18 25 33 15 25 18 - 33
Netherlands 62 69 74 6 69 62 - 74 71 83 88 1 83 71 - 88 43 56 69 8 56 43 - 69 58 71 79 71 58. - 79 59 70 78 2 70 59 - 78
Norway 46 67 93 9 67 46 - 93 18 42 64 10 42 18 - 64 22 48 64 10 48 22 - 64 6 47 79 47 6 - 79 34 51 73 6 51 34 - 73
South Africa 56 66 80 11 66 56. - 80 34 46 63 9 46 34 - 63 43 60 77 6 60 43 - 77 8 40 57 40 8 - 57. 44 53 63 9 53 44 - 63
Sweden 73 77 82 3 77 73 - 82 43 57 70 5 57 43 - 70 64 70 78 3 70 64 - 78 66 73 88 73 66 - 88 65 69 74 1 69 65 - 74
Switzerland 56 70 84 5 70 56. - 84 40 65 82 4 65 40 - 82 26 42 78 13 42 26 - 78 18 29 49 29 18 - 49 43 52 71 11 52 43 - 71
United Kingdom 61 66 76 10 66 61 - 76 42 56 71 7 56 42 - 71 48 63 86 5 63 48 - 86 24 47 63 47 24 - 63 50 58 65 7 58 50 - 65
United States 79 87 94 1 87 79 - 94 24 41 59 11 41 24 - 59 31 47 59 11 47 31 - 59 5 35 64 35 5 - 64 38 52 67 10 52 38 - 67

Factor results

View data, rankings and analysis of each factors (cost, governance, performance and responsible investment)

Country results

View data, rankings and analysis of the 15 countries and underlying pension funds

Insights

Funds need to evolve governance disclosures

Funds need to evolve governance disclosures

While funds around the world do a good job of disclosing governance frameworks related to financial and investment risks, as revealed in the GPTB, but what is best practice for communicating governance around addressing large, one-off events such as the impact of COVID or war?

GPTB shows pension transparency improvement

GPTB shows pension transparency improvement

The transparency of pension fund disclosures has improved in the past year across the 15 countries and 75 pension funds measured in the Global Pension Transparency Benchmark, a collaboration between Top1000funds.com and CEM Benchmarking.

Innovation needed on fund disclosure of corporate strategy

Innovation needed on fund disclosure of corporate strategy

A minority of pension funds reviewed for the GPTB publicly disclosure their organizational strategy in a way that goes beyond disclosures of economic and market conditions and the impact on the performance of their investments. Michael Reid argues there is room for improvement in communicating key corporate activities to stakeholders.

Leads

Edsart Heuberger

Product manager, CEM Benchmarking

Amanda White

“We are passionate about improving the global pension industry and we think shining the light on these elements that drive value will do that”

Advisory Board

Keith Ambachtsheer

President, KPA Advisory Services; co-founder and board member, CEM

Fiona Dunsire

Not-for-profit board member

Lorelei Graye

Founder, Adopting Data Standards

Angélique Laskewitz

Director, Association of Investors for Sustainable Development

Neil Murphy

Vice-president, communications, Investment Management Corporation of Ontario

David Atkin, independent arbiter

Chief executive, PRI

Each esteemed member of the GPTB advisory board brings a unique perspective on the importance of transparency and reporting from all corners of the globe. Their feedback and ideas have been instrumental in developing this concept.

Please note, your details will be shared with both CEM and Top1000funds.com. Your data will never be shared with any other organisations or third parties.