• Home
  • Admin/Tech
  • Benefits
  • Buzz
  • DB
  • DC
  • Diversity
  • Investment
  • Law & regulation
  • Risk reduction
  • Events
  • Whitepapers
  • Spotlights
  • Digital Edition
  • PPTV
  • Newsletters
  • Sign in
  •  
      • Newsletters
      • Account details
      • Contact support
      • Sign out
     
    •  

      You are currently accessing ProfessionalPensions via your Enterprise account.

      If you already have an account please use the link below to sign in.

      If you have any problems with your access or would like to request an individual access account please contact our customer service team.

      Phone: +44 (0) 1858 438800

      Email: [email protected]

      • Sign in
  • Follow us
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
    • Newsletters
    • YouTube
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • Events
    • Upcoming events
      event logo
      Webinar: How have DC investment strategies weathered the pandemic?

      This webinar will look at DC investment strategy – how well it has delivered through the pandemic, how volatile it has been and whether there are areas that have been shown to be wanting.

      • Date: 14 Apr 2021
      • Webinar
      event logo
      Webinar: Fiduciary management and transaction costs

      In this webinar, we will explore the concept of transaction costs through a fiduciary lens – looking at why best execution is critical to managing transaction costs; asking if having the right infrastructure and governance structures are pre-requisites to successfully managing transaction costs; and assessing the link between transaction costs and returns.

      • Date: 15 Apr 2021
      • Webinar
      event logo
      Defined Contribution Conference

      Professional Pensions Defined Contribution virtual event, hopes to take stock of the last year, and ask the important questions; are members saving enough and have we improved the member journey at retirement? This two part digital event will provide you with the latest thinking and innovation in the DC market during our snappy 15 minute presentations, with plenty of time to ask questions during our live speaker Q&A.

      • Date: 20 Apr 2021
      • Digital Conference
      event logo
      Webinar: PP Talks - Fiduciary Management

      This PP Talks webinar will ask how fiduciary managers coped with the Covid-19 challenge, how fiduciary management clients generally fared, and the outlook for the year ahead.

      • Date: 05 May 2021
      • Webinar
      View all events
      Follow our Professional Pension Events

      Sign up to receive email alerts about our events

      Sign up

  • Whitepapers
    • How DC schemes can gain exposure to different asset classes in a low-return environment

      So far, DC plans have largely been focused on the onset of auto-enrolment and changes to the regulatory framework - be it the ‘charge cap,' ‘pension freedoms' or consultations around ‘value for money', says Annabel Tonry, Executive Director at J.P. Morgan Asset Management (JPMAM).

      Download
      Pension freedoms three years on

      In 2015 George Osborne, then the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, decided that those age over 55 could take much more of their pension in cash. This has since opened up a range of possibilities for DC scheme members in the world of pensions.

      Download
      Find whitepapers
      Search by title or subject area
      View all whitepapers
  • Spotlights
  • Digital Edition
Professional Pensions
Professional Pensions
Sponsored by T. Rowe Price
  • Home
  • Admin/Tech
  • Benefits
  • Buzz
  • DB
  • DC
  • Diversity
  • Investment
  • Law & regulation
  • Risk reduction
 
    • Newsletters
    • Account details
    • Contact support
    • Sign out
 
  •  

    You are currently accessing ProfessionalPensions via your Enterprise account.

    If you already have an account please use the link below to sign in.

    If you have any problems with your access or would like to request an individual access account please contact our customer service team.

    Phone: +44 (0) 1858 438800

    Email: [email protected]

    • Sign in
  • Defined Contribution

Have IGCs improved value for money in contract-based pensions?

Have IGCs improved value for money in contract-based pensions?
  • Kim Kaveh
  • Kim Kaveh
  • 09 April 2018
  • Tweet  
  • Facebook  
  • LinkedIn  
  • Send to  
0 Comments

At a glance:

  • IGCs have made progress to define value for money and lower charges
  • Most still not disclosing all transaction costs, despite some improvements 
  • Fundamental failings in pensions should be mentioned in next year’s reports

A third round of IGC reports show most have lowered charges, but transaction costs remain hard to pin down. Kim Kaveh looks at the key findings.

Three years have passed since independent governance committees (IGC) were introduced to improve value for money in contract-based pensions to generate better outcomes for members.

The third annual reports have started rolling in from the likes of Standard Life, Aegon, Prudential, Legal & General, Blackrock, Aviva and Scottish Widows.

Related articles

  • Perspective DocWatch (legislation and regulatory materials) - February 2021
  • Sammons Salary Survey 2020: Confidence over career moves growing
  • Green gilts to become 'one stop shop' for scheme needs despite 'greenium' and 'greenwashing' fears
  • 2021 outlook: What's next for scheme governance?

Most report that charges have been lowered, but more work is needed to ensure all transaction costs are disclosed.

First Actuarial director Henry Tapper says the key thing for IGCs to work out is that, "for the amount of money that they pay for their workplace pensions, people are getting a good value service."

All IGCs report that overall, most members are receiving good value for money from their workplace pensions.

Defining value

But are IGCs any closer to defining what ‘value for money' is?

When the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) first introduced IGCs, it did not provide a definition. It instead asked them to provide their own specific definition, and produce comprehensive guidance about how to assess value for money.

Similarities have been found in how they assess this. For example, all included ‘investment' in their assessment framework, along with communication, engagement and costs.

However, there are some differences. For example, there was no mention of administration in Prudential or Standard Life's assessment framework, whereas other firms have included it.

Aegon's IGC chairman Ian Pittaway, who is also a senior partner at Sackers, says Aegon has evolved its value for money principles over the years, but it is a "moving feast and we need to ensure we are getting them right."

Some IGCs have also simplified their assessment of value for money in comparison to last year's reports.

For example, Legal & General and Aegon's IGCs have included a small diagram to present this information, which arguably makes it easier for members to digest.

Tapper agrees, and adds: "Defining value for money is cosmetically getting better, but the fundamental issues about if we can use these IGC reports to establish who's doing well, who is delivering value for money, and who isn't, is pretty tough. The consumer isn't getting that yet."

Lower charges

One fundamental theme within the reports was to establish whether charges have been lowered for members since last year's reports.

Most IGCs reported to have an annual charge cap at 1% or lower for their legacy schemes - similarly to last year - despite there being no regulatory charge cap for such schemes.

Indeed, there have been some positive movements.

For example, Aegon's IGC reported that over 1.2 million customers covering 94% of customers the IGC is responsible for - have an annual charge of 1% or less with concrete plans to increase this to 98% during 2018.

In addition - in early 2018 - the insurer completed a review of its workplace pensions programme. As a result, it ensured that over 575,000 members will not be charged more than 0.75% of their fund value each year.

This applies to all members who are paying contributions to an active scheme, unless they explicitly choose to invest in "specialist and costly funds."

Furthermore, the Scottish Widows IGC report  stated the provider has capped ‘peaks' in scheme charges applied to legacy products at 1%, as it promised to do so in last year's report. The IGC confirmed these changes were completed in 2017.

However, issues still remain.

The number of Standard Life members charged over 1% annually increased from 45,557 as at December 2016, to 57,715 by the end of last year among over two million members.

Nonetheless, it is still a major improvement from the end of 2015, when 266,684 members were charged more than 1% annually.

It is important to note that its report stated that members would only be charged above 1% if they select more expensive fund options, or pay for financial advice as part of their charges.

Scottish Widows' IGC chairman Babloo Ramamurthy, who is also independent chairman and non-executive director at B&CE, says charges play an important role in determining value for money.

"When they're high, it can have a significant effect on a pension pot over a long period of time. The IGC negotiated a cap on charges with Scottish Widows which applies to all of the company's older workplace pension schemes."

Transaction costs

In last year's reports, IGCs admitted there is more work to be done on transaction costs, as despite some progress many firms were using ‘best guess estimates' to come up with the figures.

Have there been improvements in the past year? In some cases, yes.

For example, the Scottish Widows IGC received transaction cost data for just under 300 funds, and costs for all but one fund within its workplace pension range were disclosed this year.

This exception was a fund of less than £3m (less than 0.01% of total assets) that invests in assets where transaction costs are not readily assessed based on current industry guidance.

This is an improvement, as last year, the IGC analysed transaction costs for just 29 of the largest equity funds used in the Pension Investment Approaches (PIAs).

As of 3 January, FCA regulated firms must supply information about transaction costs using the FCA's ‘slippage cost' methodology, as well as information about administration charges and any other appropriate contextual data.

This should make it easier in future for IGCs to assess value for money and disclose these charges to their customers - especially as most firms did not disclose all of their costs in this year's report.

For example, Aegon's IGC stated that the timing of the report meant it could not include specific transaction costs, so it asked the insurer to provide an estimate of 2017 costs for its own default fund. It stated that based on the estimates - costs were less than 15p per £1,000 fund.

Sackers partner and chair of Aegon's IGC Ian Pittaway says: "We could not disclose all costs as we did not have time to do so from January. However, come spring 2019, we will have had enough time to get that information under our belt."

Meanwhile, Standard Life informed the IGC that it has been unable to access all of the data required to provide full transaction costs given the "wider industry challenges" around the capturing and distribution of source data such as ‘arrival prices.'

It provided its IGC with ‘aggregate transaction costs' for its core default funds, and found the costs fell within 0 basis points (bps) to 12 bps.

This is an improvement from 2015 - as ‘estimated figures' showed that yearly transaction costs for the core default funds were within the range of 10 bps to 20 bps.

Prudential IGC's analysis of around 85% of unit-linked funds found just over 60% of funds under management had transaction costs of less than 0.1%, and a small increase for the flagship default fund from 0.07% in 2017 to 0.09% in 2018. The transaction costs were broadly the same as reported last year, using the IGC's own methodology, as some asset managers were finding it difficult produce the results any quicker under the FCA's methodology. However, two funds covering 1% of Prudential's funds under management charged more than 40 bps.

Meanwhile, the Scottish Widows IGC noted transaction costs were higher for actively managed funds that invest in a smaller number of assets that are regularly reviewed by the fund manager and can involve higher levels of trading. Of the 291 funds analysed, 13 had transaction costs over 50 bps.

The higher the number of transactions within a fund's strategy - or the portfolio turnover rate - the higher the transaction cost level. Passive investment generally incurs fewer costs than active.

Commenting on the Scottish Widows findings, Ramamurthy says: "The level of transaction charges at this point is not giving the IGC cause for concern."

However, Tapper says in general, transaction cost disclosure is still not at the level it should be. "I've had lots of arguments and conversations with people and they agree we need to find a way of fully disclosing all of the costs that members have, if we are to get to a fully inclusive cost calculation."

Moving forward

All IGCs provided information for planned improvements for next year's reports. Aside from all stating they will disclose transaction costs - the IGCs also promised to improve efforts to provide value for money to members.

For example, Aegon and Scottish Widows said they will modernise their systems to achieve this.

The Scottish Widows IGC said these changes should improve value for money in the future and "better inform customers who are considering whether they should switch to a different type of product."

Meanwhile, Aegon will continue to move its customers to its modern digital platform called the ‘upgrade programme' - which was introduced last year to ensure all customers benefit from the governments restrictions on charges within workplace pensions.

The IGC stated it will ensure all members who choose to upgrade "clearly receive value for money."

Nonetheless, some industry experts say IGCs are missing some fundamental points which must be mentioned next year.

First of all, some reports are arguably too long - for example Standard Life IGC's report was the longest seen by PP at 88 pages, while BlackRock IGC's report was just 15 pages.

This may not necessarily engaging for members, and reports might need to be simplified in future.

Tapper agrees, and adds: "I don't see any kind of real attempt to get to grips with ‘are we doing well compared to our major competitors?'

It is also arguable that IGCs are not picking up on some of the wider issues in pensions.

Tapper continues: "IGCs should be including how we should address things like collective defined contribution (CDC), and pension transfers.

"Transfers are a massive issue as many members transferred out of their defined benefit scheme last year and none of it has found itself into non-advised products."

He further added that next year, he wants to see IGCs "getting tough on some of these topical issues and set out an agenda to deal with them."

Clearly, IGCs have made progress in delivering value for money since they were introduced. However, there is still much work to do done on calculating and disclosing transaction costs using the FCA's methodology.

Moving forward, they could also consider discussing wider issues. 

  • Tweet  
  • Facebook  
  • LinkedIn  
  • Send to  
  • Topics
  • Defined Contribution
  • defined contribution
  • Henry Tapper
  • Legal & General
  • BlackRock
  • Scottish Widows
  • Aviva
  • Aegon
  • Prudential
  • IGC
  • IGC report
  • case-study

More on Defined Contribution

 Catherine Gill
Industry Voice: The master plan

In Newton’s latest DC column, Catherine Gill explores how master trusts can evolve their investment strategies against a changing backdrop

  • Defined Contribution
  • 07 April 2021
Consolidation in DC is continuing with the total number of non-micro and hybrid schemes falling by 10% in 2020
TPR data reveals further consolidation in occupational DC market

The occupational defined contribution (DC) market consolidated further in 2020 with the number of trust-based plans falling substantially during the year, latest data from The Pensions Regulator (TPR) reveals.

  • Defined Contribution
  • 31 March 2021
AE contributions must rise to 12% to put the UK on par with the rest of the OECD countries, TISA says.
UK mandatory pension provision half OECD average

Auto-enrolment (AE) contributions must rise to 12% to put the UK on par with the rest of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, The Investing and Saving Alliance (TISA) says.

  • Defined Contribution
  • 25 March 2021
Savova: "For too many, pensions remain inaccessible"
PensionBee to float on the London Stock Exchange

PensionBee has announced its intention to float on the high growth segment of the main market of the London Stock Exchange (LSE).

  • Defined Contribution
  • 24 March 2021
Capital Cranfield Trustees' Andy Cheseldine has been named chair of the new group
Industry working group formed to tackle small pension pots problem

An industry co-ordination group has been established to take forward the recommendations of the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP’s) small pension pots working group.

  • Law and Regulation
  • 24 March 2021
blog comments powered by Disqus
Back to Top

Most read

BT, Ford and M&S schemes to proceed with judicial review over RPI reform
BT, Ford and M&S schemes to proceed with judicial review over RPI reform
Isio records £41.2m revenue in first seven months
Isio records £41.2m revenue in first seven months
Industry Voice: Are inflation jitters justified?
Industry Voice: Are inflation jitters justified?
Industry Voice: Impact investing -why it matters now more than ever
Industry Voice: Impact investing -why it matters now more than ever
Ditch complex rise in normal minimum pension age, says Quilter
Ditch complex rise in normal minimum pension age, says Quilter
Trustpilot

 

  • Contact Us
  • Marketing solutions
  • About Incisive Media
  • Terms and conditions
  • Policies
  • Careers
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Newsletters
  • YouTube

© Incisive Business Media (IP) Limited, Published by Incisive Business Media Limited, New London House, 172 Drury Lane, London WC2B 5QR, registered in England and Wales with company registration numbers 09177174 & 09178013

Digital publisher of the year
Digital publisher of the year 2010, 2013, 2016 & 2017
Loading