7 fund categories, scored on 1-year returns, plus a fee (FER) comparison — one toggle, both angles at once.
Hong Kong's MPF system lets you choose funds across different trustees, but the same category (say, "Asian Equity Fund") can differ by dozens of percentage points in return depending on the provider — driven by differences in asset allocation, stock selection, and fees (FER). Looking at a single fund's return in isolation isn't the full picture; a category-wide score shows which providers are consistently strong across all 7 categories.
Fees (FER) are another factor that's easy to overlook: two funds in the same category can have similar returns, but over a long enough horizon, a 0.5 percentage point fee difference compounds into a meaningful drag on returns. This page brings the performance score and the fee comparison together in one place — toggle between the two to compare both angles side by side.
Each category is ranked and scored; a higher total means stronger overall performance across the categories covered.
Data source: MPFA (Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority) Fund Platform, official figures as of 2026/06/30 — all 67 provider × category combinations on the same date
| Rank | Provider | Total Score | Categories | Avg / Category |
|---|
How scoring works: within each category, the N providers with an equivalent fund are ranked 1 to N; the top return scores N points, the next N−1, and so on down to 1 point for last. Scores across all 7 categories are summed into a total. 1-year figures come from the MPFA (Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority) Fund Platform, official data as of 2026/06/30, net of Fund Expense Ratio (FER).
Same 7 fund categories — this time comparing fees (FER), not returns.
Data source: AAStocks, pulled 2026/06/30 in a single snapshot — all 67 provider × category combinations on the same date
| Rank | Provider | Avg FER | Cheapest Category | Priciest Category | Categories |
|---|
What "fee" means here: the figures use the Fund Expense Ratio (FER) — total annual cost (management fee, custodian fee, administration fee, and other recurring charges combined) as a percentage of net asset value. It's the MPFA's standard disclosure metric, not just the "management fee" line alone. The Core Accumulation Fund (the legally-mandated DIS default) is fee-capped by regulation — management fee ≤ 0.75% plus expenses ≤ 0.2% — which is why every provider clusters tightly around 0.75–0.81% in that category; that's expected, not an error.
Calculate whether your MPF is enough for 25 years of retirement in 3 minutes, and find your retirement gap.
CSPF contributions are much higher than MPF, but fund choice and management strategy are completely different — know the difference.
A licensed advisor personally analyses your actual portfolio — not a one-off check, but ongoing investment advice.
This page only shows 1-year returns. WhatsApp me for the longer-term (2/3/5-year) performance comparison, tailored to your situation.
Within each fund category, providers with an equivalent fund are ranked 1 to N; the highest return scores N points, the next scores N-1, and so on down to 1 point for last place. Scores across all 7 categories are summed into a total. A provider with no fund in a category neither earns nor loses points for it — the table shows exactly how many categories each provider was actually scored in.
FER (Fund Expense Ratio) is the total annual cost — management fee, custodian fee, administration fee and other recurring charges combined — as a percentage of net asset value. It's the MPFA's standard disclosure metric. A "management fee" alone is only one component of FER and isn't disclosed consistently across providers, so FER is the number that's actually comparable.
Not necessarily. Fees and performance are two separate questions — a cheap fund isn't automatically a worse performer, and an expensive one isn't automatically better. We'd suggest checking both the performance score and the fee comparison together.
A * means that provider has no dedicated fund exactly matching this category — the closest available substitute is shown instead. Its scope may not exactly match the category label; for reference only.
Not necessarily. Past performance is not indicative of future results, and switching funds should factor in your risk tolerance, investment horizon, and overall asset allocation. WhatsApp us for a free comparison to see exactly where your current fund ranks and whether an adjustment makes sense.