MPF Gauge | Zerion Research

Start with your fund

Rank within the mandate. Compare the evidence. Then investigate.

The directory covers the current scheme and constituent-fund list from the official MPF Fund Platform. Rankings stay within the same official fund type, while ZBI separates peer context from a verified mandate benchmark.

01Navigate the category

Find stronger or weaker historical standing among comparable funds.

02Read the benchmark gap

Separate peer context from an official or fund-specific benchmark.

03Open the ZBI layer

Test mandate, exposure and opportunity cost when the data supports it.

Official snapshot24 schemes · 451 funds

Fund data as at 31 Aug 2026; DIS references as at Aug 2026. Missing official values remain n.a.

Open MPFA platform ↗

Ranking navigator

Find a fund's standing without comparing unlike mandates.

Each rank is calculated only among funds in the same official MPFA fund type with a return for the selected period. It is a research shortcut, not a recommendation or suitability score.

Search fund or schemeFund categorySchemeReturn periodOrder by

Preparing the official universeLoading rankings…

Ranks will appear when the snapshot is ready.

Fund finder

Which MPF plan do you have?

MPF schemeConstituent fund

Not sure which one you hold? Check your latest MPF statement or your trustee account before comparing.

Loading the official-source snapshot…

Ready when you are

Select a scheme and fund to see the essentials.

No finance vocabulary is required to begin. Each metric includes a short interpretation below.

Basic comparison

Compare up to three funds on the same measures.

Add a fund above. You can then switch schemes and add two more.

Rank

Standing only within the same official fund type and selected period.

Return

What the fund delivered after fees over the stated period. It does not explain why.

FER

The historical annual expense ratio. Lower cost helps, but cost alone does not establish suitability.

Risk

Risk class and volatility help compare movement, not every possible source of loss.

ZBI

Separates peer reference, mandate benchmark, exposure, and feasible alternative questions.

Zerion Benchmark Principle

Evaluate the opportunity set the manager was entrusted to manage.

Investment performance should be evaluated against the opportunity set and risk exposures the manager was entrusted to manage, not merely against other funds or absolute returns.

A positive return can still lag a reasonable passive blend. That gap changes the research question, but does not answer it by itself: currency exposure, hedging, rebalancing, cash flows, transaction costs, fees and portfolio construction can all affect the comparison.

Why three benchmarks

Keep strategy, implementation and feasible choice separate.

Matching only the fund's latest exposures can hide the value or risk created by allocation decisions. ZBI therefore keeps the mandate benchmark fixed while allowing the exposure benchmark to evolve from dated disclosures.

01

Mandate Benchmark

A rules-based blend derived from the fund's declared long-term investment policy. It remains fixed for the evaluation period so allocation decisions stay visible.

Did the overall management strategy add value?

02

Exposure Benchmark

A period-specific blend based on disclosed actual asset allocations, using only information that was available at the time.

What did the reported exposures approximately deliver?

03

Alternative Benchmark

A comparable, investable and lower-cost fund or portfolio that a member could realistically have selected instead.

Was a feasible alternative more effective?

No hindsight allocation. A historical exposure benchmark should use allocation snapshots that were available at each point in time, not today's portfolio applied retrospectively.

Advanced ZBI layer

Go beyond the headline return.

Enter total returns in the same reporting currency and for the same period. The default values reproduce a hypothetical mixed-asset MPF example; they are not observations for a real fund.

Inputs

Fund and comparison period

Fund nameReporting currencyFund return after fees (%)Alternative return after fees (%)Fund expense ratio (%)Alternative annual cost (%)

Asset sleeve	Mandate weight	Exposure weight	Total return
US equities	%	%	%
Hong Kong equities	%	%	%
Bonds	%	%	%
Cash / other	%	%	%
Weight total	100.0%	100.0%	Same-period returns

Both weight sets total 100%. Returns are treated as total returns in the selected reporting currency.

Mandate benchmark gap

-2.50 ppHypothetical MPF Fund A versus its rules-based mandate benchmark.

Mandate benchmark10.00%Fixed policy blend

Exposure benchmark10.18%Dated allocation blend

Alternative benchmark9.20%Feasible lower-cost option

Mandate drift7.00 ppPortfolio share reallocated

Approximate attribution

Separate allocation from implementation.

+0.18 pp + -2.68 pp = -2.50 pp

Allocation effect+0.18 pp

Exposure benchmark minus mandate benchmark.

Implementation gap-2.68 pp

Fund return minus exposure benchmark.

Alternative gap-1.70 pp

Fund return minus feasible alternative.

Incremental annual fee+0.70 pp

A research prompt, not proof of causation.

Return comparison

One period, four reference points.

Zero-centered scale

Mandate

10.00%

Exposure

10.18%

Fund

7.50%

Alternative

9.20%

Retirement opportunity cost

Translate a return gap into member outcomes.

Starting balanceAnnual contributionIllustration horizon

Fund pathHK$0

Mandate pathHK$0

Illustrated opportunity costHK$0

Constant annual returns and year-end contributions are used only to illustrate compounding. This is not a forecast and does not model volatility, contribution timing, switching costs or taxes.

Research memo

What the current inputs suggest

Capability map

What ZBI can answer, and what still needs data.

The engine begins at the asset-class and geographic level. Full holdings would improve precision, but are not required to frame the first benchmark-relative questions.

Benchmark GapInteractive now

Fund return relative to its mandate benchmark.

Allocation EffectInteractive now

Approximate return effect of moving from mandate to disclosed exposures.

Implementation GapInteractive now

Residual versus the exposure benchmark; not a pure security-selection measure.

Mandate DriftInteractive now

Share of the portfolio reallocated across the modeled sleeves.

Opportunity CostInteractive now

Long-horizon balance difference under constant-return assumptions.

Performance ConsistencyNeeds history

Frequency and persistence of benchmark-relative performance across periods.

Update and correction policy

Readers should know what changed and when.

MPF Gauge will not present an undated score as current. Each published fund view should identify its source period, benchmark rules, methodology version, last review date, and known coverage limits.

Fund directoryMonthly source check

Refresh when the official MPF Fund Platform advances its reporting date or the registered scheme and fund list changes.

Fund disclosuresAfter each new fact sheet

Once named-fund coverage begins, target publication within 10 business days after the relevant disclosure is available and checked.

Benchmark dataEach measurement period

Use same-period total-return indices, reporting-currency conversion, and the stated hedging and rebalancing rules.

ZBI methodologyQuarterly and event-driven

Review every quarter and whenever regulation, disclosure standards, index construction, or a material assumption changes.

CorrectionsAs soon as verified

Material corrections receive a dated note in the Zerion Update Log rather than silently replacing the prior interpretation.

Open the Zerion Update Log Inspect the Source Register

Official disclosure foundation

Build from documents members can inspect.

MPFA materials describe fund fact sheets as including objectives, portfolio allocation, performance, expenses, risk information and a performance benchmark where one is stated. DIS funds also have industry reference portfolios.

Official source

MPFA Scheme Document Repository

Fund fact sheets, scheme information, investment focus, portfolio allocation and document access.

Official source

MPFA Disclosure of Information

Official description of fund fact sheet content, asset allocation, expenses and benchmark comparison.

Official source

MPFA Default Investment Strategy FAQ

Reference portfolios for Core Accumulation and Age 65 Plus funds and the purpose of the DIS.

Recognized reference data

HKIFA / FTSE Russell DIS Reference Portfolios

Matched-period reference returns and portfolio construction for Core Accumulation and Age 65 Plus funds.

Important disclaimer

Educational research, not investment or retirement advice.

MPF Gauge and Zerion Benchmark Intelligence are independent Zerion Research tools. They are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority, any trustee, fund manager, index provider, or other product issuer.

All outputs depend on the completeness, timing, comparability, and accuracy of user-entered or published inputs. A benchmark gap does not by itself establish manager skill, poor management, suitability, or the result a member could actually have achieved. Currency exposure, hedging, cash flows, rebalancing, transaction costs, fees, taxes, portfolio constraints, data revisions, and investability can materially change the comparison.

The fund directory reproduces official MPFA platform fields as at the date shown; it is not a live feed. Category ranks compare historical returns only within the same official fund type and are not ratings, recommendations, or suitability assessments. Recognized DIS reference returns are sourced from HKIFA / FTSE Russell; other proxy labels and user-editable ZBI inputs do not use live or licensed index data. Nothing on this page is financial, investment, retirement, tax, or legal advice, and past performance is not a guarantee of future results. Users remain responsible for their own research and decisions.