MPF Had a Solid First Half in 2026
According to estimates published by MPF Ratings (led by Francis Chung), the MPF system recorded a 1.45 percent loss in June 2026, but Q2 (April to June) returns still reached 7.81 percent, driving H1 (January to June) returns to 5.67 percent. Based on average member contribution size, this translates to an estimated per-member investment gain of around HK$18,500 for H1, and around HK$25,000 for Q2 alone.
If you only look at these headline numbers, you might think "H1 was decent, nothing to worry about." But that "average looks fine" framing hides something worth paying closer attention to.
Behind the "Average Looks Fine" Headline: A 126-Percentage-Point Gap
The same MPF Ratings dataset, cross-referenced with MPFGo statistics, found that among 397 comparable MPF constituent funds in Hong Kong (excluding money market and guaranteed funds), the best-performing fund returned 111.41 percent in H1, while the worst-performing fund lost 14.65 percent — a gap of 126.06 percentage points between the best and worst.
Put simply: two MPF members who each started the year with HK$1 million — one in the best-performing group of funds, one in the worst — could end up more than HK$1 million apart after just six months. This isn't a hypothetical risk. It already happened.
Breaking it down by asset category, the divide is just as clear:
| Fund category | June 2026 return | H1 2026 return |
|---|---|---|
| Asian equity funds | -1.17% | +27.93% |
| Japan equity funds | -0.76% | +15.27% |
| Global equity funds | -0.24% | +11.86% |
| US equity funds | -1.37% | +8.17% |
| DIS – Core Accumulation Fund | -0.35% | +7.59% |
| Hong Kong & China equity funds | -5.73% | -0.98% |
Worth noting: Hong Kong & China equity funds were the only equity category in negative territory for H1. Yet MPF Ratings points out that US equity funds and Hong Kong & China equity funds are historically the most popular and largest equity asset categories in the MPF system — meaning many members who simply "follow the crowd" may not end up in this year's winning category.
The Blind Spot for High Earners: This Gap Hits Your Wallet Hardest
A 126-percentage-point gap affects everyone proportionally, but the absolute dollar difference scales with your account balance. If you've been contributing for a long time, or making TVC voluntary contributions for tax savings, your MPF balance is likely well above the average member's — which means the same percentage gap translates into a much larger absolute number for you.
The problem: most people never actively review their fund choice after making it once. The fund you picked on your first day of work may have sat untouched for five, ten years — but market-leading asset categories rotate. As seen in H1 2026, Asian and Japanese equities significantly outperformed, while the once-most-popular US and Hong Kong/China equities lagged or turned negative. "Pick once and forget" tends to reveal its cost exactly during these market rotations.
3 Questions Worth Asking Yourself Right Now
-
Q
Do you know which asset category your current MPF contributions are invested in — off the top of your head?
-
Q
When was the last time you actively reviewed or switched your fund allocation?
-
Q
If someone asked whether your MPF beat or lagged the market in H1 2026, could you answer without pulling up your statement first?
If you can't answer all three, that's not unusual — it's the norm for most working professionals, because most people help you pick a fund once and consider the job done; very few keep watching whether your MPF allocation still fits you.
So What Should You Do?
This article isn't telling you to switch into whichever fund performed best — chasing past winners is itself a risk, and past returns don't repeat on demand. Which fund suits you depends on your risk tolerance, investment horizon, and overall financial picture — a personalised judgment call that no single article can make for you.
But this 126-percentage-point example makes one thing clear: MPF isn't a "choose once and done" product — leadership rotation between asset categories is the norm, not the exception. This is exactly the distinction IPP has always emphasised: most advisors help you pick a fund once and stop there. IPP offers one of the market's few continuous MPF investment advisory services — using technical analysis to keep monitoring your allocation, and proactively notifying you when market conditions change, so you don't have to remember when it's time to review.
Want to see how your current fund allocation compares with other options? Use our Fund Comparison tool to check return performance across fund categories. Want to know exactly how much your MPF contributes toward closing your retirement gap? Use our Retirement Calculator to find out in 3 minutes.
Source: Estimates published by MPF Ratings on 7 July 2026 (June and H1 return by fund category, the 126.06-percentage-point gap between best- and worst-performing funds, per-member investment gain), verified against the original Hong Kong Economic Times (hket.com) report dated 7 July 2026, and cross-checked for consistency against same-day coverage from Ming Pao Finance, HK01, and Hong Kong Economic Journal. The MPF system's aggregate net asset value (HK$1,665,466 million as at 30 June 2026) is quoted from the MPFA's official Quarterly Report, June 2026 issue (mpfa.org.hk), verified 24 August 2026. This article is general educational content, does not constitute investment advice, and does not recommend any specific fund or provider. Investments involve risk; past performance is not indicative of future results. Please refer to your own MPF statement and the latest official MPFA announcements for actual arrangements, and consult a licensed advisor.