Pension Management

As financial worries increasingly prompt Britons to attempt to review their finances and reduce their debts, one aspect that may be overlooked is the pension. With various surveys demonstrating the extent to which people are finding themselves having to cope with mounting credit card bills and loan payments, thoughts about saving for retirement could be pushed to the back of minds.Yet it could well be that the current economic problems highlight just how important careful financial planning is. This is certainly the view of the Association of British Insurers (ABI), which has produced a guide aimed at addressing the issues and concerns consumers may have.Simply entitled ‘People need pensions’, it intends to make just that point. The ABI observed that confidence is the most important factor in pulling through the recession, but investments and long term savings have taken a knock due to stock market falls.Director of consumer strategy at the organisation Maggie Craig explained that pensions remain an excellent prospect, particularly as savers can benefit from “free money” – both from the government and employers.”Saving for retirement is crucial both for individuals, as it helps to ensure they will have a more comfortable retirement, and for society, as it reduces the burden on future generations of taxpayers,” she remarked.And the importance of having a nest egg in place has been emphasised by a recent study by Help the Aged and Age Concern. Beginning early could be the key, as nearly half of those over the age of 50 told the charities that they are less confident their pension and savings will be enough to fund retirement than they were six months ago. The organisations also cited Office for National Statistics figures showing that the number of unemployed people in this group has risen nearly 50 per cent over the last year, which could mean even more people are relying on their investments.One provider that has recognised the need for investments to be made is Scottish Widows, which has announced the launch of two new multi-manager funds. Through these, customers are being offered the chance to see their money spread across a range of assets – including equities, commodities, bonds and property.This particular approach may not be to everyone’s liking, but the advice from various quarters does appear to be clear – consumers should not forget about pensions despite the economic problems currently taking hold around the world. To this end, Ms Craig stated: “In these difficult economic times, it is especially important that people make the right decisions about their finances, now and in the future.”

OVERVIEW:

As the nation awaits the second actuarial evaluation of the National Social Security & Insurance Trust (NASSIT), a thorough analysis and understanding of the initial actuarial valuation report conducted by Canadian based actuarial firm Regie Des Rentes Du Quebec (RRQ) for the period ending December 31, 2004, is instructive in assessing the performance and future viability of the nation’s pension scheme.

Pursuant to Article 47 of the National Social Security & Insurance Trust Act, 2001 an actuarial evaluation of the pension scheme is by law required every 3 years during the first ten years of the pension scheme and once every five years thereafter. The scheme was initially implemented in 2002 with the first actuarial valuation performed in 2004. The second statutory valuation should therefore be conducted by 2007/2008 and an actuarial report issued soon thereafter.

The 2004 RRQ actuarial studies report while acknowledging the general good financial condition of the scheme, as expected of start-up schemes without pension payment liabilities, however highlighted areas of concern and deficiencies that both Sierra Leonean policymakers and pension participants must be made aware of and requisite steps taken to address in order to forestall the Trust’s failure and potential bankruptcy.

Aside from the need for growth in the insured population and the need for more scheme experience data, the actuarial report paid especial focus on the exorbitant administrative expenses and costs and the management of investments, as areas of concern requiring corrective measures.

ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS

 

An analysis of the pension scheme’s administrative costs, according to the actuarial report, reveals that NASSIT’s “administrative expenses compared to insurable earnings were higher than the level expected in the inception report ”.

It is worth noting that at inception of the scheme an industry best practice expenditure for administrative costs was pegged at 1% of insured earnings as recommended by the International Labor Organization (ILO).

However, since 2002 when administrative costs were at 1,691 billion Leones, the administrative costs have progressively increased to 3,250 billion Leones in 2003 and to a whopping 6,407 billion Leones in 2004. As noted in the RRQ actuarial report, the 2004 costs exceeded the ILO recommended 1% for the scheme’s administrative costs by a proportion of 230%.

In the recently published annual report for 2006, NASSIT reported general administrative expenses at 15.3 billion Leones while the Trust’s payments in pensions amounted to a paltry 1.9 billion Leones. The 15.3 billion Leones in administrative costs represented an increase from 14.4 billion Leones in the previous 2005 fiscal year. Thus as of the year 2005, administrative costs represented 5 percent of the insurable earnings of the scheme. Such a ratio glaringly is economically untenable as even when compared with other African countries 1.5% for administrative costs, the trajectory of NASSIT’s administrative costs remains one of the highest in the world.

The amoebic growth in the Trust’s administrative costs has continued to balloon as figures for the year ended 2007, revealed that the stratospheric sum of 22.1 billion Leones was expended as administrative costs and expenses.

While acknowledging that nascent pension schemes generally have higher administrative costs at beginning than matured schemes, and factoring that the “initial seed money of 4.5 billion Leones provided by the government for setting up of the Scheme was fully refunded by the end of the third year”, the continued growth in administrative costs with no apparent oversight or checks and balances by the Trustees / Board of Directors reflects a lack of good governance controls and potential inefficiencies that must be addressed and corrected.

For should this trend continue, the Trust will be rendered bankrupt and the country, the statutory guarantor of the pensions will be saddled with unfunded pensions by the time the equilibrium period ends and pension liabilities are at their peek. As fiduciaries, the board members must be seen as exercising their fiduciary duties on behalf of the pension scheme’s participants- the workers of Sierra Leone.

 

STAFF COSTS

Staff costs represent a large percentage of the administrative costs and were estimated to consume more than 55% of total expenditures of the pension scheme. For example, payroll costs increased from 5.1 billion Leones to 8.2 billion Leones from 2005 to 2006. As at the period ending December 2006, the scheme employed 227 employees representing a net employee increase of 6 from the prior year. In 2005 the scheme reported a total of 221 employees on its payroll. The 6 new employees the scheme employed in 2006 in addition to whatever cost of living increases in salary paid the existing employees could most certainly not explain the exorbitant increase in the wage bill of the scheme.

As of the second quarter of 2008, the Trust reportedly has a total of 275 employees, an increase in its employee rolls from 227 in 2006.

Moreover, in addition to staff costs, the remuneration of key management personnel salaries and allowances substantially increased from 1.6 billion to 2.2 billion Leones from 2005 to 2006.

According to the NASSIT staff matrix, the scheme has 8 executives and 13 senior management positions. If “key management” refers to only these positions, it thus represents 21 personnel who over a one year period received as salaries and remuneration an additional humongous sum of 2.2 billion Leones from the Sierra Leone workers pension fund.

GENERAL COST

Aside from staff costs as reviewed above, the amorphous category of “General Costs” represents about 30 percent of the scheme’s expenditures. Whilst initially at 543 million Leones in 2002, general costs expenditure had ballooned to 963 million Leones in 2003 and to an exorbitant 2.1 billion Leones in 2004.

It should be noted that while administrative costs by the year 2004 represented 95.4 percent of total benefit expenditures and 24.0 percent of contribution income of the entire pension scheme, the continued fiscal viability of the pension scheme is greatly at stake as an inordinate amount of contributions of workers hard earned wages seem to be spent on the scheme’s management and staff expenses.

ANALYSIS OF INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO

Since a major source of financing for the Trust is investment income, which derived from the right investment mix and returns determines and ensures the scheme participants level of pension benefits, this article will not be complete without an analysis of the NASSIT’s current investment strategy.

The scheme’s investment strategy policy has been adjudged in the actuarial report as economically and actuarially well designed. The devil however is in the implementation of this well designed policy. Especially as relates to stocks in companies, the absence of an adequate financial infrastructure where shares and stocks can easily be traded to free up cash flow exposes the Trust to additional investment risks.

Despite this shortcoming in the country‘s financial environment, the Scheme has poured over 39 billion Leones into equity investments, even though the country does not have a functional stock exchange.

A review and analysis of the types of businesses and ventures the Scheme’s equity investment has been directed into causes risk concerns for achievement of the expressed strategic objectives of the investments portfolio and for the continued viability of the scheme.

The Scheme in 2006 increased its equity asset mix from 11.4% in 2005 to 20% in 2006. This category represented, aside from Treasury Bills, the largest percentage investment by the Scheme.

LONG TERM INVESTMENTS

As of 2006, the Scheme’s long term investment portfolio totaled 39.6 billion Leones, comprised of equity investments in the following:

1) Debentures in SierraBlocks of 8.2 billion Leons.

2) Equity investment in SierraBlocks of 7.1 billion Leones.

3) Equity investment in Barock Investment of 7,268,000

4) Equity in Regimanual Gray SL Limited of 6,000,000.

5) Equity in Gouji Property Investment of 9,129,992.

6) Equity investment in Eco Bank of 3,033,917 Leones.

7) Equity investment in Kimbima Hotel of 5,296,414.

Equity investment in Sierra Leone Brewery of 7,005.

The scheme’s investment liability exposure in the cement block making company, SierraBlocks represents a 60% ownership shares with a concomitant 60% of liability. Such exposure of the scheme’s capital and considering the high costs of the homes Regimanuel Gray is selling in Goodrich must serve as a warning signal that returns from this venture are likely to fail to conform to minimization of costs and risks associated with investments-a core objective of the scheme‘s investment policy.

The scheme’s experience with the Gouji Property Investment when it prematurely recalled its equity investment and reportedly only received a portion of the Trust’s initial capital investment is highly instructive.

Currently, contribution accumulation represents the main source of asset increase in the scheme’s portfolio. Since the scheme is young and growing this trend will continue. However, the laws of diminishing returns will very soon set in and contributions not only will remain stagnant but will inevitably regress resulting in an adverse impact on the scheme’s investment mix.

CONTRIBUTION DELIQUENCIES

As a mandatory pension scheme all employers and employees are required to contribute into the Trust. However, an alarming trend witnessed over the past five years of the Trust’s existence shows that government departments and parastatals are the greatest delinquents with mounting arrears of contributions owed to the Trust on behalf of their workers. For example, as recorded in the Trust’s 2006 annual report, total contribution delinquency increased from 9.1 billion Leones in 2004 to 12.9 billion Leones in 2006. This amount subsequently increased to 16.2 billion Leones in 2007 and as of the second quarter of 2008, the contribution arrears stood at 19.4 billion Leones.

The main reason adduced for this delinquency is the non-compliance by government ministries, departments and parastatals whose contribution arrears rose from 2.1 billion Leones in 2004 to 5.5 billion Leones in 2006. The trend of non-compliance by parastatals especially continues unabated as recent statistics for the second quarter shows that their non-compliance is currently at 10 billion Leones.

With all the statutory instruments at its disposal, the Trust must be aggressive in ensuring outstanding contributions are immediately recouped. A reduction and elimination of the arrears must be a benchmark in assessing management’s productivity and efficiency. The Sierra Leone landscape is dotted with government services institutions and companies that have failed by their inability to ensure user-service payments are timely collected for services, be it insurance, electricity, water supply and other public services. At this rate and trending, NASSIT is setting itself up for the same demise.

PROPOSAL FOR EXPANSION OF THE INSURED POPULATION

The participation of Sierra Leone’s diasporas in the country’s pension scheme, the NASSIT, represents one such creative and out of the box thinking that management and the government must urgently explore.

Diaspora participation in NASSIT could be achieved by a system of purchase of credits in foreign currencies, into the pension scheme, modeled on the concept of “Diaspora Bonds”; where countries raise financing from their overseas diasporas through a debt instrument .

However, unlike a debt instrument, the sale of credits into the NASSIT pension scheme allows diasporas to participate in the nation’s social security system with benefits inuring to both the diaspora participant and the NASSIT. In the case of the diasporas it ensures:

Patriotism, as participation affords continued connection to the home country.

Satisfaction of contributing to and participating in the home country’s national economic growth.

Protection as a risk management tool, as the survivor’s benefit component of the pension scheme will afford benefits to beneficiaries in the home country, in the event of the death or disability of the diaspora participant.

In the case of the country and NASSIT, it provides:

Extension of the covered population, providing additional private sector capacity, which the scheme desperately needs to meet actuarial projections.

Access to foreign capital remittances, as contributions would be made in foreign currencies.

Risk diversification, as the foreign capital infused into the scheme could be invested in foreign investments and international bonds, stocks and indexes.

Needed capital for developmental programs such as the current NASSIT low cost housing project.

 

CONCLUSION:

The establishment of the pension scheme in Sierra Leone represents a singular achievement in public policy implementation over the past 30 years and if properly executed and managed long-term will serve generations of workers and contribute positively to economic and social development of the country. It is thus in accord with the tremendous expectations for success of the scheme that the above critique and suggestions for curtailing the run away administrative costs of the Trust are been proffered not only to management but especially the Board of Directors.

Before considering whether it is a good idea, it might be helpful to take a quick look at just what is pension drawdown.
Replace that “drawdown” with “withdraw” and it can perhaps be most readily understood as the ability to withdraw money from your pension fund and leave the balance invested, so that (hopefully) it continues to grow. This ability therefore gives the pension holder an additional option on retirement: instead of using the pension for the one-off purchase of a lifetime annuity, funds can be withdrawn or drawn down for the purchase of an annuity at a later date. And the later the date, of course, the more attractive the annuity should be. Tit does mean, however, that you will probably need an alternative source of income in the meantime.
Clearly, this will give you a much greater degree of flexibility in the use of your pension and preserves the opportunity of a remaining pension fund that you could pass on to your children on your death (provided, of course, that the fund is still a reasonably significant amount).
If the pension fund is sufficiently large, you will be able to draw down income and continue to manage the balance of the fund, making any necessary investment decisions for yourself. In other words, it allows you to stay in control of a significant source of savings and investment.
Pension drawdown could also result in your being able to increase your income when you are older. Obviously, this will depend not only on there still being a sizeable balance in the pension fund, but also that the investments perform well. The opposite is also true, of course. If the investments do not perform well, then the fund can become seriously depleted and the income in your old age could in fact be significantly reduced.
Pension drawdown thus offers a more flexible alternative to purchasing an annuity as soon as you retire. This will suit those people who feel that the one-off purchase of an annuity at too early a stage locks them into an arrangement which might not represent the best deal over the longer-term. They might also be concerned about the relatively limited death benefits that come with many annuities.
From the foregoing, therefore, it can be seen that there are attractions to a pension drawdown. But these attractions come at a price. And that price lies in the risk of things going wrong or you miscalculating a number of factors. In other words, pension drawdown represents a risk. If the worst came to the worst, your decisions could leave your remaining pension fund seriously – if not totally – depleted. This would leave you without a private pension at all in your old age.
The risk is sufficient, certainly, for it to be very unwise to consider this retirement option without first consulting an experienced independent financial adviser, who can warn you of the pitfalls and carefully explain not only the attractions, but also the drawbacks of a pension drawdown.

Everyone knows that the younger you are when you start paying into a pension, the more you’ll receive when it’s time to pay out on your retirement. Nevertheless, there are still many who delay making that start and a frightening number of people who believe that their entitlement to a basic State pension will be enough to see them comfortably through old age. While they might be right about the entitlement to a State pension, they are most unlikely to find that the State pension alone will ensure anything like a comfortable retirement. But if taking care of your own pension arrangements is to be an option, where do you go for the best pension advice?
Even a cursory look at the subject of pensions will tell you that it can become a pretty complicated topic, with a bewildering range of different products, to suit different ends and purposes. For example, you might be aware that your employer runs a pension scheme and, indeed, you believe that the employer contributes to your pension on your behalf. But is this an occupational pension scheme. If it is, do you know whether it is salary-related or whether it is a defined contribution or money purchase scheme?
Alternatively, is your employer offering a stakeholder pension scheme or running a group personal pension scheme? You have heard that it is possible to set up your own stakeholder pension. How would this differ from your having your own personal pension arrangement? Is one or the other – a stakeholder or a personal pension scheme – something you should be setting up for yourself?
These are all perfectly reasonable questions, but how on earth do you go about answering them? It’s very much a specialist subject and the ground rules seem to be changing all the time. You have might also have heard, for example, that the government is introducing changes requiring all employers to offer a pension in the future and to make contributions to the schemes set up. This can be the employer’s own scheme or the government’s new central scheme that is being established.
Yet further changes will affect the minimum age at which you can start drawing your pension benefits. Subject to the rules of your particular scheme, the minimum age is currently 50, but this will go up to age 55 by the year 2010 (though you will no longer need to stop working altogether to be able to draw the pension, provided continued employment is allowed by the rules of your particular scheme). To phase in the higher age level, pension fund managers have been given the period from April 2006 until April 2010 to raise the age limit. Clearly, you will need to know when it applies to you.
All in all, therefore, it is clear that questions about pensions can become quite complicated. They are further complicated by your need to know exactly how your own individual circumstances should affect your pension options and decisions. A pension is a long-term investment, which accumulates many thousands of pounds of your hard-earned cash – it’s important, therefore, that you are guided towards the right decisions.
Given the importance of getting it right, the sensible course of action is to consult an independent financial adviser about your existing and future pension options. This will ensure that your decisions are based on the best, professional and expert, independent pension advice.

Despite the quite considerable contributions individuals are likely to be making to them and the accumulated value they are likely to have, it is surprising how few people keep an eye on how their pension fund investments are doing. The contributions are made on the same monthly basis, come what may, regardless of the investment’s comparative performance. It seems that many people give no thought to the possibility of pension transfers and whether such a move would make sense for them.
Whether a pension transfer is something you should be considering, of course, will depend on the performance of your current pension fund. Together with your home, this is likely to be one of your larger investments and, as with any investment, you will want to make sure that your hard-earned money there is working as hard for you as it possibly can. With the value of your home, for example, you probably follow every twist and turn of local property prices and keep a fairly close watch on just how much it is worth. How many people do the same with their pension investments?
With your pension fund, it is not just the overall value and performance you will be interested in. Have you recently reviewed what management or administration fees you are paying? Could you get a better deal for less?
Ready to transfer?
If you believe it is time for a change, there are one or two things you should definitely do first before committing yourself to a transfer:
- Above all, do not consider transferring your pension without seeking the expert advice of a registered independent financial adviser;
- If you have not done so already, one of the first things your adviser will ask to see is a transfer value analysis. As the title suggests, this is an analysis which allows you to compare the value and performance of your current pension investments with the alternatives. It should include a figure called the “critical yield” (typically somewhere between 7% and 11%) which tells you how fast any replacement scheme would need to grow to match the performance of your present scheme. A good rule of thumb will be a figure of 8%. If your present scheme is returning anything less than this, then you might want to take the idea of a pension transfer further;
- What are your intentions regarding retirement? When do you hope to start drawing on your pension? If you are planning to retire early, for example, you will need to ensure that any replacement scheme to which you are intending to transfer is sufficiently flexible to allow this;
- With the help of your independent financial adviser, you will naturally want to check again the current financial position and performance of your present scheme. In the event that it is showing a surplus, with a higher value on assets than liabilities, then it could well prove worthwhile staying with your present pension fund.
Summary
It is certainly worth reviewing and monitoring your pension fund in the same way that you would any other investment, to consider the potential benefits of a pension transfer:
- Financial performance, management costs and flexibility might be a useful basis for comparison;
- Before doing anything, however, make sure that you seek the services of a reputable, independent financial adviser;
- Get a transfer value analysis of your current pension scheme;
- Take into account your actual retirement plans and any intention you might have to retire early.

The most important criteria in picking pensions or investments to deposit your funds in, is their performance.

Many investors are disappointed in their pensions and investments performance, as the majority of fund mangers cannot even beat the index!

In recent years, this has led to a huge growth in index tracker funds.

Pensions and Investments can beat the Index!
Here is an outline of what you need to look for when seeking an advisory service with the potential to achieve an above average return on your pensions and investments while keeping drawdowns low.

Also outlined is a method that has actually returned over 20% annually.

Here are four tips on getting a better return on your pensions and investments.

Four Tips to Finding a Good Pensions and Investments Manager
1. Check the past performance of all the funds under management – you want to know what is the overall performance of the fund manager – i.e. make sure they’re not just showing you the good ones.

2. Look at the drawdowns, so you know the risk of the investment. You should also find out what their policy on money management is.

3. What are the fees?

How much do you pay and how does this impact on performance and drawdown.

Fees on your pensions and investment add up!

4. Does the manager have a conflict of interest?

Fund managers who not only make management fees, but also receive some of the dealing fees manage many pensions and investments. If this is the case, there is a conflict of interest, as they may trade to earn dealing fees, rather than concentrating purely on the investments performance.

W D Gann’s Amazing Method
One trading method that you should consider when seeking above average growth potential in pensions and investments are the methods of W D Gann.

$50 million in profits!
Gann was one of the most famous investors of all time amassing a fortune of $50 million dollars. He predicted the 1929 stock market crash for example a year in advance and then proceeded to buy the Dow’s lows in 1932!

Gann died in 1955, but his methods are still in use today by astute investors and traders worldwide.

Just like any good investment method, the techniques work on a wide variety of markets and aim to run the big profitable trends and liquidate losses quickly.

Your pensions and investments can benefit from this method of trading – it’s the basic logic upon which all successful trading occurs.

It’s Your Money!
So, invest it wisely. If you have a self-administered scheme, a sipp, a stock or commodity fund, make sure that when you pick a manager you pick the right one.

Easy to Understand FREE Information
When you look at the methods of Gann, you will see why so many investors trust his unique approach to investing.

One of the reasons for searching out the services of an independent financial adviser is that pension matters are awash with esoteric terms, labels and descriptions. The self-invested pension – or Self-invested Personal Pension (Sipp) as you’ll often see it called – is a good case in point. The underlying principle is relatively straight forward and attractive, but to make the most of the opportunities it represents, it really is essential to take expert advice especially if you are considering transferring to a self-invested pension from an existing pension scheme.
What it is?
A self-invested pension shares the same basic features as any personal pension plan regarding such things as eligibility, contributions and tax relief. Instead of pension contributions being paid into an insurance policy investment however, the self-invested pension remains very much in the hands of the pension holder, even when it comes to making the investment decisions. For example, the holder can choose to invest in anything from individual shares to unit trusts, gilts, traded endowment policies, residential or commercial property and even investments in art or vintage wines.
In other words, it is the pension holder (or his financial adviser) who can make the investment decisions, rather than being tied into the insurance company’s investment portfolio in a conventional personal pension plan. If the self-invested investments are not performing as expected, therefore, it is a relatively straight forward matter of switching to higher-performing investments.
Provided you earn more than £30,000, you can also operate a self-invested pension alongside a regular occupational pension.
As with all other personal pension plans, you will not be able to draw on a self-invested pension plan until you reach the age of 50 (or 55 after the final implementation date of April 2010). Until retirement age, however, you will be allowed to contribute to your self-invested pension as much as the equivalent of a year’s salary, less any contributions you might be making to any other pension plans. As with other personal pension plans, you earn tax relief on your contributions. Effectively, therefore, for every £1,000 that is invested, you only pay £780, with the remaining £220 being paid by the Inland Revenue in the form of basic tax relief.
Self-invested pension plans have also become rather more accessible these days to a wider number of people. It is possible to set one up, for example, with a monthly contribution as little as £50, or if you are transferring from another pension, a transfer value of as little as £5,000.
Summary
A self-invested pension puts more of the investment decision cards in your own hands. You can keep a personal control over the investment strategy or appoint a financial adviser or fund manager to make the investments for you.
For those who want an active, hands-on approach to their pension management, there will be decided attractions in a self-invested pension. Nevertheless, as emphasised previously, the decision to set up a self-invested pension or to transfer funds to one from an existing pension scheme should not be taken without first consulting an independent financial adviser.

In terms of pensions management, your location in the world doesn’t matter, nor does the type of pension you have – a sipps, a self-invested personal scheme, or a self-administered scheme.

What you are interested in is that when you become a pensioner, your pension’s management has performed to provide you with a comfortable retirement and does not give you a short fall on your expected cash!

Is a 20% Return Realistic with Low Risk?

Here we want to look at how a + 20% annual return is achievable and drawdowns can be kept to manageable levels.

Pensions Management Returns

Firstly, the best way to trade the markets is without emotion and this means using a technical based approach to pensions management. The reasons for this are:

1. A technical approach to pensions management takes the emotion out of trading and allows a disciplined trading plan, which can liquidate losers quickly and run the big profitable trends.

2. If the technical system is based upon holding onto the longer term trends the commission impact on the pension’s income is less than on a shorter term strategy. This means there is more money going to you and less in fund manager’s fees.

3. Even a good technical system will not hold losing trades.

Losses will always occur for any fund manager no matter how good they are, but the most important point is that they are manageable, and a good technical method can achieve this.

Pensions Management – The Risk

The risks in any form of investing are always there, but there is a misconception about how to assess the risk. Most investors look at the location of their pension, and see this as the main investment criteria. For example:

The view may be that if a fund manager is investing in Far East tiger economies, then this is more risky than say investing in UK blue chip equities.

This is only part of the equation though. If a fund manager is actively managing the pension or investment, you need to look at a fund manager’s money management strategy.

A good money management strategy in a volatile area can reduce risk; on the other hand, a poor money management strategy in a less volatile area can increase risk.

Pensions Management – Balancing Risk and Reward

A good pensions fund manager can achieve above average performance while keeping risk at manageable levels.

Here are some points you should consider when picking a pension manager:

1. When looking for a pensions fund manager make sure that you take the time to find out the performance of all the funds under their management, not just the good ones!

2. Ask a fund manager to explain their strategy, so you know the way they manage and control the risk of your funds.

3. Get to know them and see what their approach is and their reaction to your questions.

You are trusting them with your retirement funds – so make sure you are comfortable with everything about them.

Is a 20% Return Achievable?

Yes, it is – we know because we have produced gains like these for clients and so have other pensions management groups.

Use the above as a guide when shopping around for a manager and take your time.

You work hard, when it comes to retiring and taking your pension you want to make sure your pension can provide you with a happy and comfortable retirement.