Non-state pension fund risks. Detailed information about NPF: what it is, structure and specifics of activities

However, there are some innovations in the project as well, such as informing clients about investment risks and loss of investment income in case of early transfers and maintaining a register of agents. Now, according to the law, NPFs cannot promise clients a certain rate of return when it comes to pension savings. The ANPF and NAFP did not specify what should be understood as the risks from investing, citing the fact that they had just begun to develop standards. According to an industry representative, Alexei Okhlopkov, president of the NPF Khanty-Mansiysk, the risk disclaimer is, in fact, an explanation for clients that a funded pension is an investment product, the profitability of which depends on the market situation.

Photo: Alexander Artemenkov / TASS

“The disclaimer will most likely be that investments in the securities market can bring both income and losses, and that a high positive income in the past does not mean that the same situation will be in the future,” Okhlopkov believes. Also, this disclaimer, in his opinion, should contain information about the risks of losing income in the event of an early transition to another fund - earlier than once every five years.

Now, according to the law, NPFs that have shown a negative result when investing citizens' savings as of the cut-off date (once every five years) must compensate it from own funds, notes Okhlopkov.

Market reaction

According to Yakushev, the requirement to disclose risks is a logical measure. “We are already warning clients that NPF income in the past does not guarantee future profits. This is a phrase that is already being used in fund marketing materials,” he says.

Okhlopkov believes that such an initiative is generally correct, but it is unlikely to provide citizens with additional protection. "For example, Insurance companies prescribe this in the insurance rules, which are distributed along with the policies, and take the signature from the insured that he has read it. But in fact, few insurers read these rules. Therefore, from the point of view of increasing the awareness of choice and decision-making by the insured, this is a plus, but one should not expect a big effect, ”Okhlopkov believes.

“Given that the funds attract mostly “silent people”, for the most part they don’t care if they have a loss of investment income or not, because the concept of individual pension capital that exists at the moment generally involves the complete conversion of pension savings into points,” says General Director of "Pension Partner" Sergei Okolesnov.

Register of agents

Another important innovation that could affect the market is the agent registry. According to the project, it is assumed that this information will be provided by the Pension Fund. The head of the NAPF, Konstantin Ugryumov, is convinced that this initiative is necessary to restore order with the transfer of clients from one fund to another.

At the end of 2016, the PFR almost half of the citizens out of 12 million people who wished to change their insurer. At the same time, the number of complaints to the Central Bank doubled in 2017 compared to 2015, to 5,125.

Most of the violations that NAPF fixes are connected precisely with the activities of agents, says Ugryumov. However, he believes that for the effectiveness of control over agents, it would be a good idea to legally prohibit the activities of those agents who are not included in this register.

According to Okhlopkov, the rule proposed by the regulator to the market should improve the situation with transitions. But he is more skeptical and believes that “the registry does not solve the issue of unconscious transitions of citizens at the root.”

Market response

Disclosure of the necessary information listed in the SRO can be carried out through various generally accepted channels - websites, offices of funds, etc., says Sergey Belyakov, head of the APPF. To check the NPF’s compliance with the standard, the SRO will look at how the fund fulfills the requirements in the form of posting the necessary information, and a document with the client’s signature can also be used stating that the minimum information has been brought to it, Belyakov believes.

In the future, based on the logic of the regulator, the introduction of a requirement to disclose the results of stress testing, which NPFs will be required to conduct from 2018, cannot be ruled out, says Stanislav Dmitriev, head of the risk management department at NPF Soglasie.

NPFs currently occupy a significant place not only in the system of non-state pension provision (NPO), but also in compulsory pension insurance (OPS). At the same time, the OPS segment became the main source of growth for NPFs. According to ExpertRa, in 2011, the amount of savings managed by NPFs increased 2.5 times from 155 billion rubles. to 393 billion rubles, which accounted for 36% of the pension market, and the size of the client base increased by 4 million people (an increase of 51.8%) and reached 11.87 million people. According to the forecast of Expert RA, by the end of 2012, the OPS segment will catch up with NGOs in terms of volume, and the own property of NPFs will increase by 20% and exceed 1.4 trillion. rubles.

The peculiarities of the activities of NPFs are such that some of its aspects are not subject to strict regulation within the framework of the legislation, in particular due to the non-state nature of these organizations. characteristic feature for NPFs, there is a very long period of cooperation with insured persons and participants, which provides for planning activities in conditions of uncertainty and dependence on many factors. This uncertainty allows for a purely probabilistic approach to planning. From this it follows that the activities of NPFs are characterized by a number of non-standard risks that only insurance companies face in their work, but purchase for NPFs, such as non-profit organizations, a certain uniqueness.

Thus, in view of the undeniable social significance of NPFs and their crucial role in the pension system, special attention should be paid to financial stability funds, protecting the interests of participants and insured persons, and the factor of guarantees and ensuring reliability should have the highest priority.

The presence of a significant number of risks in the pension system is one of the reasons limiting the development of NPFs in Russia. This fact, in turn, affects the efficiency of using the potential of NPFs. Since by attracting long-term investment resources to the economy and using them to the full, NPFs could play an even more prominent role in the country's financial market and become one of the factors for its stabilization and development.

All potential risks that NPFs may face can be classified into two groups. First, NPFs are exposed to internal risks, which are directly related to the effectiveness of management and the peculiarities of the functioning of NPFs. Secondly, these are external risks that do not directly depend on the activities of NPFs. Management of this group of risks is the sphere of activity of the state. Under state control are the political and economic courses of the country, the formation of legislation on non-state pension insurance, the taxation system.

Internal risks are of an individual nature and consist of asset management risk, liability management risk and administrative management risk. Asset management risk includes investment risk, which is by far the key internal risk for the NPF industry, as well as the risk of non-receipt of pension contributions.

Investment risks imply the risk of not achieving a given return, preferably not lower than the inflation rate, and the risk of a decrease in current liquidity. This risk may lead to a failure to fulfill the direct obligations of the fund in terms of the profitability of accruals to pension accounts. As you know, the most delicate moment of investing pension funds is the balance between profitability and risk. However, for pension funds, limiting risk is much more of a priority than for any other portfolios.

In the OPS system, the NPF invests pension savings, the placement of which is strictly regulated and is possible only through management companies (MC) not affiliated with the NPF on the basis of a trust management agreement. As part of the NPF activities, NPFs form pension reserves. According to the current legislation, NPFs are allowed to place their pension reserves independently or through the management company. The practice of interaction between NPFs and management companies in the field of investment control comes down to two formats. The first format involves the creation of a separate division in NPFs responsible for managing financial risks. As a result, the fund independently develops its investment strategy and broadcasts it to the management company. At the same time, the Fund conducts a strict audit of the methods of the Criminal Code and exercises control over the implementation of the management company investment declaration. Such a scheme of interaction requires significant material costs from NPFs, which explains its low prevalence in the Russian pension market. Most funds, when transferring funds to the management of the Criminal Code, follow the path of least resistance. They completely transfer the entire investment process to the managers, in rare cases holding joint investment committees with the management company.

A significant problem faced by NPFs is the selection of the most efficient management companies. There are various methods for such assessments, most of which are based on past returns and a combination of formal characteristics of the management company (length of service, number of employees, amount of funds under management). Since 2011, the National Association of Pension Funds (NAPF) has been developing an industry standard for risk management, which will set out measures to common organization risk management in the fund, as well as control of market, credit and operational risks. The development of standardization in the pension market is closely related to the problem of controlling investment risks.

NPFs that have a separate financial risk management unit and independently develop an investment strategy, based on the standard, get the opportunity to improve the investment process in accordance with the leading risk management practices in the market. The majority of NPFs, which completely transfer the entire investment process to the MC, acquire materials for the audit of the risk management systems of the MCs with which they plan to cooperate.

At present, less than half of the CMs in the trust management market have specialized divisions of the risk management system. The standard will include a significant list of requirements for the organization, including the mandatory presence of a separate risk management unit, the availability of methods and regulations used in the risk management process, as well as the procedure for updating them, and the employees of the unit responsible for risk management. Thus, in order to preserve the client base of NPFs, the management company should start reorganizing now in order to create elements of a risk management system.

Such a strict approach to the selection of MCs by NPFs will stimulate increased competition among MCs, and will help improve their efficiency and reliability. On the other hand, the introduction of the standard will lead to further consolidation of management companies in the pension segment, which in the current period is characterized by an extremely high level of captivity and a very uneven distribution of pension assets. All this will contribute to more transparent cooperation between the management companies and NPFs.

Two groups of restrictions have been identified that apply to the investment of pension savings by management companies: structural, relating to the list of objects and their share in the structure of the investment portfolio, and organizational, consisting in the requirements for an asset to be included in the investment portfolio and issuers of securities, which are allowed investment of pension savings. Thus, drawing up an investment declaration and investing pension savings is carried out by the management company under the influence of a fairly large number of not always justified restrictions. In essence, this means that the NPF operates within a certain framework, which most directly determines the boundaries for improving the management of pension savings.

Due to the right of the insured persons to annually choose the method of managing the funded part of the pension, it becomes possible to withdraw from the management company part of the funds held in trust. This fact limits the investment of pension savings in undervalued according to the results of fundamental analysis securities, as well as in infrastructure projects, investments in which would undoubtedly contribute to an increase in the efficiency of investing pension savings. It seems that the improvement of activities for the trust management of pension savings is associated with the need to minimize the negative impact of this factor on the management company.

Thus, NPFs do not have permission to independently place pension savings, and the possibility of independently investing pension reserves has been significantly reduced. It can be concluded that the process of investing pension assets is essentially not entirely controlled by the funds, and, therefore, these restrictions hinder the ability of NPFs to fully prevent investment risks, which are the most common in the pension system.

The second type of risk in asset management is the risk of non-receipt of the depositor's pension contributions. This type of risk can provoke a situation of deviation in negative side the return on investment assumed in the actuarial calculations of the assignment, which may result in the fund's failure to fulfill its obligations to accrue funds to pension accounts, as well as the solvency of the fund when paying pensions.

The risks of NPFs in the management of liabilities are not so obvious, and the consequences of the realization of these risks usually manifest themselves in the long term. The risk of managing reserves and other liabilities lies primarily in the risk of errors in the assessment of existing pension liabilities and the risk of errors in the formation of new liabilities. When calculating the required amount of pension reserves, an actuarial valuation is used, based on the principle of equivalence of the size of pension reserves and pension liabilities of NPFs. To assess the amount of pension liabilities, as a rule, the mathematical expectation of the totality of future pension payments, discounted by the time of calculation, is used. This value is calculated taking into account actuarial assumptions, namely, the forecast of the dynamics of the rate of return on investments and population mortality tables. It is obvious that the creation of a correct actuarial forecast of the dynamics of the rate of return on investments for a long period, which implies the operation of pension contracts, in an unstable economy is a very difficult task. It should also be noted that the mortality tables were developed on the basis of data on life expectancy for the country as a whole. However, life expectancy indicators for the contingent of participants in a particular fund may differ markedly from the average data. For NPFs, it would be more rational to use mortality tables developed for specific regions or for a category of people in a certain profession, since most funds are corporate organizations.

Thus, an inaccuracy in the assessment of pension obligations may be caused by the use of incorrect formulas and calculation algorithms, errors in the development or operation of computer programs, errors in the initial data, namely, distorted information about the gender of participants and their date of birth, or, as noted above, incorrect assignment of actuarial proposals (actuarial returns and mortality tables) when making calculations. In these cases, you can get a wrong idea about the obligations of the fund.

A special kind of liability management risk is the risk that the real amount of pension payments exceeds its average estimated value. It arises, as a rule, under the influence of fluctuations in the mortality of NPF participants. So, even when using theoretically adequate actuarial assumptions, using only the mathematical expectation of discounted pension payments to estimate the required amount of pension reserves is not enough due to the random, probabilistic nature of the flow of pension payments. At the same time, the more participants an NPF has, the smaller the ratio of the possible deviation of the amount of payments to its average estimate will be. This circumstance makes large pension funds more reliable than small ones.

Another significant internal risk in the activities of NPFs is the risk of administrative management. This category may include the risk of unqualified management of the fund, the risk of a crisis of founders and partners, as well as various operational risks associated with an incorrect organizational structure, methodology, personnel, errors software and technical means.

It should be noted that the risk of dishonest or unskilled management of the fund and operational risks were more typical for the first stage of the formation of NPFs, when a number of funds were organized according to the principle of financial pyramids. Partnership risk lies in the possibility of financial losses due to default by counterparties. The cooperation of NPFs is legally fixed with many financial partners (management companies, banks, special depositories). Of course, the results of activities depend on the choice of a financial partner by the NPF. This type of risk also decreases with the development of the non-state pension insurance system, since it is directly related to the development of business reputation and the accumulation of experience of financial institutions in the pension services market.

The crisis of the main founders can be indicated during the period of financial decline in the economy. However, the likelihood of such crises is very low and does not pose a significant threat to NPFs. Since the legislation prohibits NPFs from investing more than 10% of the investment portfolio of their pension reserves in the projects of the founders.

Do not forget that most of the risks that NPFs face in their activities do not depend on the fund itself, and the responsibility for some of them lies with the state, and some is due to the global state of the economy. External risks consist of the risk of changes in legislation, demographic risk, and, in addition, the risk of a stock market crisis and an economic crisis.

The legislative base of the pension reform is being continuously improved, amendments and additions are made to it. During the years of the reform, the legislation has changed several times. At the same time, practice shows that consistency, detailed elaboration and a minimum of changes in the program after the adoption of the legislative framework are extremely important for the success of the pension reform. Today, reforming the accumulative component of the pension system is not a way of its survival; forced, but it needs to be improved.

To ensure the sustainable development of the NPF system in modern conditions, it is necessary to create a specialized department responsible for regulating the industry and having the right to initiate legislation. Currently, the NPF is, in fact, controlled by the Ministry of Health and Social Development (directly issues of pensions), the Ministry of Finance (investment activities), the Ministry economic development(strategic issues) and the FFMS of Russia (licensing and operational supervision). Consequently, the approval of legislative changes on NPFs implies the coordination of the positions of these state authorities, which leads to a significant prolongation of the process of making the necessary legislative decisions.

In 2012, the first payments under the OPS are made. The law on payments of the funded part of the pension was adopted by the State Duma at the end of 2011, but it requires significant revision and the adoption of additional regulations. All four departments should take part in finalizing the legislation, from which it follows that there is high probability unavailability of the regulatory framework by the due time and the risk of failure to pay pensions under the law. And problems with the payment of the first pensions can deal a serious blow to the reputation of the NPF. The presence of a single profile regulator of the industry would help prevent situations similar to the one that arose during the adoption and finalization of the payment law.

Disputes over the advisability of introducing a single regulator in the pension segment have been going on for a long time. However, in recent times NPF managers are predominantly in favor of its creation. Thus, according to the results of an interactive survey conducted by the ExpertRA rating agency within the framework of the IV annual conference "The Future of the Pension Market", the vast majority of pension fund managers (88%) were sure that a single regulator is needed for the harmonious development of the pension market. At the same time, the majority of participants in the interactive survey believe that the FSFM or a separate body under the FFMS (67%) should become the profile regulator.

The demographic risk in the activities of NPFs is due to changes in the state of the demographic situation. The number of the population of retirement age is growing noticeably. According to Rosstat forecasts, in the next 20 years the ratio between the population of working and retirement age will worsen by one and a half times. By 2050, according to UN forecasts, this ratio will decrease by almost 2.5 times. If you look at the 100-year dynamics from 1950 to 2050, you can see that the number of retirees per worker has increased five times. According to Rosstat data for 2011, the average life expectancy in Russia was 69 years. At the same time, there is a trend towards a steady increase in life expectancy as a result of improving its quality and working conditions. For example, the average life expectancy of a woman in Russia since 1940 has increased by 44% from 42 to 74 years. It is clear that under such conditions the mechanism of the pension system cannot operate without serious changes. Therefore, now the question arose of raising the retirement age in the Russian Federation. This circumstance, in turn, can significantly affect the activities of NPFs.

It is necessary to take into account the listed risks, as well as to take into account the possibility of other risks. The exclusion of risks from consideration may lead to an excess of the amount of obligations assumed by the fund for the payment of pensions over the amount of formed pension reserves. Despite the fact that actuarial errors will manifest themselves, perhaps far from the first years of the NPF's activity, they are very likely to have Negative influence on the reliability of the fund. From the foregoing, we can conclude that it is impossible to achieve absolute reliability of NPFs, however, a set of measures taken that take into account all categories of risks, to a large extent contributes to increasing the reliability of NPFs.

NPFs have already been created socially meaningful basis non-state system of funded pensions. For its development, it is necessary to change the format of state regulation of NPFs, introduce standardization and increase the reliability of participants. A gradual transition from a strict restrictive policy in the field of placement of pension funds to the rules of prudent investment, the development of own risk management systems in funds and management companies, as well as building clearer relationships with management companies should become priority areas for improving the business processes of NPFs in order to strengthen their reliability.

Every year the number of Russians who prefer to keep their pension savings in NPFs is growing. At the beginning of 2018, the value of PFR assets in rubles was 1.8 trillion, and there were 2.4 trillion in NPF accounts for the same period. rubles. In September 2018, the amount of funds of clients of non-state PF increased to 3.6 trillion. rubles. To whom and where to entrust the savings - to the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation or the NPF, it is necessary for each future pensioner to decide.

Structure of pension contributions

According to the letter of the law, the pension consists of two parts: insurance and funded, respectively, 16% and 6% of the total amount. The insurance component is stored only in Vnesheconombank (PFR) and is used to pay pensions to those who have reached a certain age. It is assumed that the second, accumulative part, will become the object of investment and will bring profit to the depositor in the future. In addition, any citizen can form a future funded part on his own, for which he makes voluntary contributions to the selected organization.

What is the difference between insurance and funded pensions, look at the picture:

Important! In 2014, the State Duma adopted a draft moratorium, or freezing of funded pensions. To date, employers' pension contributions are fully used to form the insurance part of the pension.

How to determine which is better - NPF or PFR?

Both public and private Pension Fund have similar tasks: to accumulate and manage the deposits of citizens, reduce the risks of depreciation of the money supply, and ensure profitability on deposits. At first sight , what is the difference is not entirely obvious, besides, each structure has its own advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, future pension recipients have a question - where to entrust their savings?

FIU or NPF? Short review see in the video:

Advantages and disadvantages of the PFR

look comparative analysis VEB portfolio returns in recent years:

The PFR, or the Pension Fund of Russia, collects contributions paid by employers, places them on accounts, and distributes funds. PF is a state structure that implements a social program for the payment of maternity capital, for social payments to disabled people and participants in the Second World War, and other categories of citizens.

The benefits of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation include:

• Safety and reliability. The structure cannot become bankrupt, or lose its license.
• Guarantee of indexation of funds taking into account inflation by investing in government bonds. According to the Central Bank, the average yield of PF is 7% per year.
• No taxation of accumulated funds.

The main drawbacks of the system are low returns compared to NPFs and difficulties with inheriting capital.

Pros and cons of NPF

NPF is a private fund, whose activities are regulated by law, dealing with the social security of citizens. The fund invests the funds invested by investors in various investment projects and receives income. Since the list of possible financial instruments is long, the profit of an NPF can be much higher than that of an FIU. But there is also a risk of loss if the investment turns out to be ineffective. The benefits of non-state funds include:

• Strict government control.
• A wide network of agencies providing high level service.
• The possibility of establishing inheritance shares on a contractual basis.
• The accumulated amount can be received at a time when you retire.
• Opportunity to change from one private fund to another every 5 years.
• Mandatory deposit insurance. If a license is revoked from a private fund, the savings will be transferred to the state, without indexation and with the loss of accumulated interest.
• Transparency of calculations, monitoring the amount of pension contributions and accrued interest in your personal account.
• High reward amount.

What is the percentage of profitability of PFR and NPF? For example, NPF Almaznaya Osen increased the savings of its depositors by 11.2% against VEB's 8.5% in 2017. Based on these data, you can understand where it is more profitable to store pension savings.

Where NPF funds are invested, see the picture:

The main disadvantages of NPF:

• Risk of bankruptcy and loss of investment income.
• High requirements of the Central Bank for this sector of the economy, as a result of violations, the organization risks losing its license.

Important! When choosing a non-state PF, you need to check whether it is included in the register of participating funds.

What to choose and how to go?

By default, all pension contributions are transferred to VEB. If the investor is satisfied with everything, his capital will be kept in the PFR until retirement. If the taxpayer wants his funded part of the pension to generate income, he needs to leave the category of "silent" and notify the management company about this, and then decide on the choice of the NPF. In doing so, the following criteria must be taken into account:

• Financial indicators: profitability, the amount of assets that make up the property of the fund, the increase in savings. It is necessary to pay attention to what percentage of profitability has been maintained over the past 5 years.
• Length of time on the market.
• Presence of major shareholders.
• Positive media reviews or no negative ones.
• Transparency of information and quality of service, including online.

The picture shows a sample application for the transfer from the PFR to the NPF:

In case of revocation of a license from a non-state fund, its assets are transferred to the FIU within 3 months. If depositors wish to keep the accumulated money, they should be transferred to another NPF, which should be notified by submitting an application. In this case, the main part of the savings will remain, and the investment reward is calculated based on the results of the sale of NPF assets.

To determine what is better than the PFR or NPF of Sberbank, the largest NPF in the Russian Federation, and where it is more profitable to keep pension savings, consider the table:

It turns out that each structure has its pros and cons. . It is up to each citizen of Russia personally to decide where it is better to keep pension savings. To do this, it is desirable to master the basics of financial literacy and monitor the rating of organizations on which the future depends.

Conflicts with management companies are forcing non-state pension funds to create their own risk management units. Only the largest NPFs will be able to afford it, so the market is waiting for a new wave of consolidation.

Losses shown in 2008 from the placement of pension funds by management companies (according to Expert RA - up to -25% for pension reserves and up to -20% for pension savings) led to a series litigation between the NPF and the UK regarding the minimum guaranteed return (MGD) and the safety of funds.

At the same time, only a small proportion of disagreements resulted in lawsuits: most market participants preferred to reach an agreement. However, the results of 2008 will affect the relationship between management companies and NPFs: since, in the end, it is the funds that bear obligations to depositors and insured persons, they will have to take on part of the risk management functions themselves.

Negotiation Path

The expansion of the investment declaration on pension reserves makes the NPF's negotiating positions on the issue of regulating relations stronger: pension funds account for about a third of the trust management market and serve as an important source of income for management companies. Thus, the funds will be able to reduce their risks associated with possible overly aggressive actions of the management company on the market by fixing additional conditions in the agreement, for example, by limiting the list of issuers in which funds can be placed. “In our opinion, such a tool allows a non-state pension fund to improve the quality of management credit risk, since in this case the fund will be able to independently control the placement of funds and cut off potentially risky securities,” Alexander Zhirkov, Chairman of the Board of NPF LUKOIL-GARANT, shares his experience.

Another option for controlling the management company by the fund is regular meetings with the NPF representatives adjusting the investment strategy of the manager. “We regularly hold meetings of the Investment Committee together with representatives of management companies,” says Anton Ostrovsky, executive director of NPF Telecom-Soyuz. “This allows you to quickly monitor, analyze and control the risks that arise in the process of placing pension reserves and investing pension savings, as well as increase the stability of the fund.”

The described options for controlling the actions of the management company will be ineffective without the creation of a high-quality risk management system within the funds themselves. However, the creation of a high-quality risk management system capable of promptly monitoring and responding to changes in the economy is possible only within the framework of large funds. A pension fund with a small business and a low amount of property to support the statutory activities (IOA) simply cannot afford to ensure the functioning of such a system. The prospects for small NPFs are aggravated by the need to compensate for losses from the placement of pension funds received in 2008.

Elimination game

According to Expert RA, as of October 1, 2009, the majority of NPFs won back the losses caused by the crisis, however, there is a gap between the profitability from the placement of funds and the income accrued to the individual accounts of depositors over the same period (the average profitability over three years was only 5, 5% for pension reserves and 4.19% for pension savings). The need to compensate for this gap will not allow funds to fully divert this year's profits to their own needs. This will limit the ability of NPFs to finance their activities, including the development and improvement of risk management systems necessary to control the activities of management companies.

Against the backdrop of a reduction in corporate pension programs (according to Expert RA, pension contributions fell by an average of 30% in the market), small funds will not be able to cover losses and at the same time organize risk management systems, and therefore will be forced to leave the market. At best, by merging with larger players, and at worst, with a missed "hole" between liabilities and assets and a revoked license. “The current restrictions on the minimum level of IOAI are too lenient,” says Svetlana Kasina, executive director of the National APF. - In the absence of investment income, funds need at least 300-500 million rubles to ensure trouble-free functioning. A similar position is shared by Alexander Zhirkov from NPF LUKOIL-GARANT: “According to our estimates, the independent development of a non-state pension fund - namely, independent development that does not occur at the expense of the founders - is possible if there is an amount of pension savings and pension reserves from 1 billion rubles. dollars. Such a business size allows, without risking the funds of participants and insured persons, to develop and maintain regional infrastructure, improve the quality of customer service.”

During 2010-2011 under the pressure of the changed rules of the game, 25% - 35% of participants may leave the market, but at the same time, market consolidation around large funds will be a step towards improving the quality of risk management, and therefore an important step towards improving the reliability of the system and protecting the interests of future pensioners.

Profitable Conservatives

In the wake of the fight against risks, the conservatism of NPF investment portfolios is growing. If there were no fundamental changes in the structure of pension reserves in 2009, then the structure of pension savings has undergone significant changes in the current year due to the growth in the share of fixed income instruments with relatively low riskiness, such as Money on bank accounts and sub-federal bonds (see sidebar).

Throughout 2010, the structure of NPF investment portfolios is likely to remain as conservative as it is now. At the same time, the composition of the instruments used by the funds is likely to be replenished with infrastructure bonds. On the one hand, the launch of such securities into circulation is promoted by the largest market players and issuers, on the other hand, funds are in dire need of long and reliable securities. “Studies show that the return on infrastructure projects is higher than the return on shares. Thus, investments in the American infrastructure made it possible to obtain an average annual return on investment of about 12.8% per annum compared to 9.2% per annum on investments in the US stock market for the period from 1997 to 2007, - says Yuri Sizov, Deputy General Director of Leader Management Company for Strategic Issues . “At the same time, investments in infrastructure projects are less volatile, since in times of crisis, the demand for infrastructure services in most cases decreases much less than in other areas.”

Incision.

In 2009, the conservatism of the structure of pension savings increased significantly. Thus, if at the end of 2008, according to Expert RA, deposits in commercial banks and money on current accounts accounted for no more than 9% of pension savings, then as of October 1, 2009, the share of such instruments exceeded 16%. Another trend emerging in the pension savings market is an increase in the share of subfederal bonds, which is due to their relatively high yield with actual low risks against the backdrop of broad financial support. federal authorities regions.

Russians still have many options for choosing a non-state pension fund. But this must be done consciously and responsibly.

Photo: Fotolia/Photobank

November and December are traditionally the most active months, when Russians are in a hurry to choose a pension fund to which they can entrust their savings. This year, about 4.7 million people have already applied for a pension transfer. But how not to make a mistake with the choice of fund? What should you pay attention to?

The Silent Ones Are No Longer Silent

VEB's assets now contain about 1.8 trillion rubles of pension savings, against 2.4 trillion rubles that have accumulated in the accounts of non-state pension funds. Judging by the speed with which citizens are fleeing from the state, the pension fund of the state management company will continue to “lose weight”. This year, more than 2.6 million silent people have decided to withdraw their money from VEB.

Neither the risks of changing the state management company to private funds, nor the loss of profitability stop future pensioners. 99% of transfers from VEB to NPF were early. Last year, due to early transfers, they lost about 27 billion rubles, Nikolai Tsekhomsky, First Deputy Chairman of Vnesheconombank, said in August. In total, citizens took over 240 billion rubles of pension savings from VEB.

But are Russians so wrong when they decide to change their pension manager, regardless of the risks of losing their earned income? Market participants attribute the increase in transfers to private NPFs to the activity of intermediary agents, but there are other reasons as well. In particular, any person more or less knowledgeable about the pension system knows that, unlike PFR pensions, savings in NPFs can be inherited. It is clear that many people prefer to transfer money to their relatives, in which case, rather than donate it to the state.

Another reason: after the Ministry of Finance announced a new concept of the pension system (the system of individual pension capital. Not yet approved), under which citizens must make contributions to future pensions on their own, the question arose of what will happen to the money of the “silent ones”. The idea of ​​transforming them into pension points clearly did not find support among the population. After all, what are PFR points and how does it depend on them real size future pension, not a single expert will undertake to explain. In addition, new deductions within the framework of the system of individual pension capital, as conceived by the authors of the program, should go to the fund, which already contains the savings of a particular citizen. The deductions of those who did not choose the NPF will fall into a randomly selected fund.

It turns out that, in fact, citizens have very little time left to decide on the choice of an NPF, into which to transfer savings and into which deductions from the IPC will be received. According to the plan of the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank, the new pension system should start operating in 2019. True, whether they will have time to pass the necessary law is a big question.

In any case, you need to decide what to do with your future pension as soon as possible.

Selection criteria: profitability and a major shareholder are more important than geography and personal connections

To help make the right choice, Banki.ru decided to interview those who are professionally involved in managing pension money - NPF and UK. Market participants were asked to prioritize the following fund selection criteria:

- return on investment;

- the size of the fund's assets;

- the presence of a major shareholder;

- financial indicators: profit, etc.;

- subjective assessment of the fund's reliability;

- availability of additional services;

- bonuses from the agent;

- presence / absence of negative information about the fund in the media;

- personal acquaintance with the management of the fund;

- geographical proximity to the place of residence;

- possible loss of investment income.

Market participants also had the opportunity to enter their own criterion, which is not on the list, but for some reason they consider it important. A total of 20 largest pension funds and management companies were surveyed.

And that's what happened. Among the most important criteria to consider when choosing a fund, more than half of the experts surveyed indicated the return on investment, the possible loss of investment income and the presence of a major shareholder. The last criterion, according to many market participants, is evidence of the fund's reliability.

According to Larisa Gorchakovskaya, Director General of NPF VTB, “if the shareholder is, for example, a large state-owned bank, this will be an additional guarantee of reliability.” In addition, she points out, the future pensioner needs to clearly understand where and how the fund accepts documents for the payment of pensions. So that later you don’t have to travel across the country to the only office of the selected fund to apply for a pension.

The profitability shown by the selected NPF, as noted by most of the market participants we interviewed, must be looked at on a fairly long horizon - at least several years. Denis Rudomanenko, General Director of NPF Lukoil-Garant, says that, given the length of the process of forming a funded pension, clients should definitely look at the accumulated profitability. On what results your fund shows on the optimal period for evaluation - at least within 8-10 years. “A one- or two-year return is not a good measure of the performance of the fund that manages your pension,” he says.

Profitability of the portfolio of pension savings of the largest funds in 2016*

* The ranking includes funds with more than 1 million insured persons.