CPF Account Value Thread 2026

[highsulphur]

There is no obligation for CPF Board to invest in SSGS. It is a convenience provided by the Government of Singapore for the benefit of both.

FWIW, it would not harm the CPF members that CPF board invests part of its SA in high-quality equity.

Barring a calamity, hardly for CPF member to lose all.

There is no point for cpf board to take any risk. It is there to serve one purpose and one purpose only. To enable Singaporeans to take care of their retirement. If any member wish to take on any equity risk, he is free to do so himself

 

[BBCWatcher]

If any member wish to take on any equity risk, he is free to do so himself

Including with his/her own CPF Ordinary Account dollars above S$20,000. (And even arguably with CPF Special Account dollars above S$40,000, to a degree.)

 

[CrashWire]

CPF pre-dates the Government of Singapore, if I am not wrong. It started during colonial time. It may continue to function even after the Government of Singapore ceases to exist.

The PAP can easily close down CPF if they want by amending the CPF Act.

CPF is not in our constitution. And even if it is, the PAP has a supermajority and can amend that part too.

 

[fr33d0m]

The PAP can easily close down CPF if they want by amending the CPF Act.

CPF is not in our constitution. And even if it is, the PAP has a supermajority and can amend that part too.

LOL. It will be a political suicide…

Is every party member losing their mind…?

 

[fr33d0m]

There is no point for cpf board to take any risk. It is there to serve one purpose and one purpose only. To enable Singaporeans to take care of their retirement. If any member wish to take on any equity risk, he is free to do so himself

This can be said for most if not all pension funds all over the world… However, as a collective scheme, it can and has been done by many pension funds and alike, with much lower cost than individual investment.

 

[highsulphur]

This can be said for most if not all pension funds all over the world… However, as a collective scheme, it can and has been done by many pension funds and alike, with much lower cost than individual investment.

The risk taking is passed on to other agencies like Temasek MAS and GIC.

 

[fr33d0m]

The risk taking is passed on to other agencies like Temasek MAS and GIC.

In this case, CPF should invest some of the money with funds managed by Temasek/GIC, instead of taking a almost fixed return…instead, we got one of the least dynamic financial markets.

 

[RedsYWNA]

In this case, CPF should invest some of the money with funds managed by Temasek/GIC, instead of taking a almost fixed return…instead, we got one of the least dynamic financial markets.

I think the current CPF setup is not that bad. Members can use OA to invest in low cost unit trust or property, while getting 4% for SA and MA.

It's not ideal but it is much better than the old days in which OA can realistically only be best used in buying property

 

[wutawa]

I think the current CPF setup is not that bad. Members can use OA to invest in low cost unit trust or property, while getting 4% for SA and MA.

It's not ideal but it is much better than the old days in which OA can realistically only be best used in buying property

unit trust fees are much cheaper as compared to the old days. we can invest 100% in ut and non-gold etf, after setting aside $20k.

 

[BBCWatcher]

I think the current CPF setup is not that bad. Members can use OA to invest in low cost unit trust or property, while getting 4% for SA and MA.
It's not ideal but it is much better than the old days in which OA can realistically only be best used in buying property

unit trust fees are much cheaper as compared to the old days. we can invest 100% in ut and non-gold etf, after setting aside $20k.

Yes, you only effectively must set aside these minimums in CPF:

• Before age 55: whatever must land in your MA and SA(*), plus at least $20,000 in OA(**)
• From age 55 onward: whatever must land in your MA, plus at least the Basic Retirement Sum in your RA

You can invest all other CPF dollars, and the investment options are much improved.

(*) Although SA dollars above $40,000 technically have a few CPF Investment Scheme (SA) options available, I personally don't consider them attractive enough compared to SA's floor interest rate. But some people are investing SA dollars above $40,000.

(**) The $20,000 retention amount is evaluated only when you withdraw from OA to make an investment via the CPF Investment Scheme (OA). You can subsequently use the $20,000 for qualified housing or education.

 

[limster]

I think the current CPF setup is not that bad. Members can use OA to invest in low cost unit trust or property, while getting 4% for SA and MA.

It's not ideal but it is much better than the old days in which OA can realistically only be best used in buying property

Totally agree that CPF investment options are so much better now. I'm from the old days where my OA was mainly used to buy STI ETF during the GFC and some expensive unit trusts like First State Bridge and First State China.

But in general, I prefer to treat CPF money as part of the bond component of my portfolio. as I don't believe in 100% equities and sleep better at night knowing that I have reserves available. The last time I used CPF-OA to invest was 2020 COVID crash.

 

[BBCWatcher]

But in general, I prefer to treat CPF money as part of the bond component of my portfolio. as I don't believe in 100% equities and sleep better at night knowing that I have reserves available. The last time I used CPF-OA to invest was 2020 COVID crash.

If you treat CPF savings as bond-like, it's mathematically impossible to have a 100% allocation to stocks. The CPF Board doesn't allow that.

My suggestion is to ignore the CPF Board's defaults when deciding what your preferred portfolio allocation is. Then, after making your allocation decision, you execute it. CPF-bound savings would presumably be the final source of investment dollars since investment-related costs there are a bit higher than they are for unrestricted cash. And if your preference happens to be some higher allocation to stocks than what unrestricted cash and investable CPF savings combined would allow, you just "do the best you can" and get as close as allowed to your desired stock allocation target.

 

[fr33d0m]

I think the current CPF setup is not that bad. Members can use OA to invest in low cost unit trust or property, while getting 4% for SA and MA.

It's not ideal but it is much better than the old days in which OA can realistically only be best used in buying property

You can continue to do that with your OA. But for more stable funding sources such as SA/RA/CPF LIFE, equity risk can be embedded to enhance return, as many pensions funds do, rather than providing the options of target date funds.

 

[s0crates]

You can continue to do that with your OA. But for more stable funding sources such as SA/RA/CPF LIFE, equity risk can be embedded to enhance return, as many pensions funds do, rather than providing the options of target date funds.

The cpf system has already moulded the expectations of cpf members that it should provide risk free, higher than market risk free returns while outsourcing the investment piece to GIC.

Even if you were to be thanos and have the power to wipe away half the population, the remaining half will still be bloody stubborn as a mule and expect the same setup for cpf.

Fundamentally I disagree that pension monies are guaranteed a paltry long term return while the outsourced investment returns are used to fund the budget, but hey, if people are just (generally) supporting the annual budget and hence subsidising my income tax through not investing my cpf should I be unhappy?

I invested all my OA and SA, which are all untaxed income and pay fairly low tax. This is the best possible outcome for me.

 

[RedsYWNA]

I invested all my OA and SA, which are all untaxed income and pay fairly low tax. This is the best possible outcome for me.

I am curious on the SA part. What options are available that can beat 4% on a risk-adjusted basis?

My OA is with Amundi Prime USA, which I think will easily beat 2.5% but for 4% SA, I dont see much options

 

[hwmook]

I am curious on the SA part. What options are available that can beat 4% on a risk-adjusted basis?

My OA is with Amundi Prime USA, which I think will easily beat 2.5% but for 4% SA, I dont see much options

Schroder multi assest revolution

 

[highsulphur]

I am curious on the SA part. What options are available that can beat 4% on a risk-adjusted basis?

My OA is with Amundi Prime USA, which I think will easily beat 2.5% but for 4% SA, I dont see much options

Don't touch your SA

 

[BBCWatcher]

Schroder multi assest revolution

This fund, I believe.

I would only consider doing this if your CPF Special Account were your last available source of investment dollars AND you really, really want greater exposure to stocks than what your other investable dollars can provide. It's a ridiculously expensive way to get up to ~70% of your SA dollars (the ones above S$40,000) into stocks. The fund benchmarks itself against a 70-30 stocks-bonds portfolio, and it carries a very high expense ratio of 1.49%.

But even that's a stretch, frankly. Let's suppose you have S$200,000 of investable dollars outside CPF SA and an SA balance of S$90,000, meaning you have S$50,000 of investable SA dollars for a total of S$250,000. And you've decided that investing S$200,000 in stocks isn't enough for you, that you want even more exposure to stocks. Instead of investing your 4.0+% p.a. interest earning SA dollars in a high cost unit trust, why don't you head over to the options exchanges and effectively increase your exposure to stocks that way (using part of the S$200,000)? You can make ridiculously "exciting" bets in the options exchanges if S$200,000 in a simple long stocks position isn't exciting enough for you.

 

[s0crates]

I am curious on the SA part. What options are available that can beat 4% on a risk-adjusted basis?

My OA is with Amundi Prime USA, which I think will easily beat 2.5% but for 4% SA, I dont see much options

Nothing even beats cpf oa 2.5% on a risk-adjusted basis, since OA rates most of the time handily beat similar no risk options like tbills or fixed deposit.

The risked adjusted argument doesn't apply when you have a long investment horizon. SA monies are locked up till 55 now, the real question is, what asset allocation, less cost of fund manager/platform, and possible negative alpha, can reliably beat 4%?

Schroders Multi asset revolution does that. Recently endowus allows access to the higher risk version. I have been happily investing in those for the past 2+ years and it has done well for me.

 

[wutawa]

Nothing even beats cpf oa 2.5% on a risk-adjusted basis, since OA rates most of the time handily beat similar no risk options like tbills or fixed deposit.

The risked adjusted argument doesn't apply when you have a long investment horizon. SA monies are locked up till 55 now, the real question is, what asset allocation, less cost of fund manager/platform, and possible negative alpha, can reliably beat 4%?

Schroders Multi asset revolution does that. Recently endowus allows access to the higher risk version. I have been happily investing in those for the past 2+ years and it has done well for me.

1 who shares his experience vs 1 with arbitrary numbers