THE PHILIPPINES’ pension system saw its score improve in the 2026 edition of Marsh CFA Institute’s Global Pension Index but remained near the bottom.
The Philippines’ overall score, which is graded based on adequacy, sustainability, and integrity, improved to 49.2 in 2026 from 47.1 in 2025, the report showed.
This was the fourth-lowest score among 55 retirement income systems included in the Global Pension Index, ahead of India (46.8), Turkiye (46.6), and Argentina (43.7).
Last year, the Philippines’ pension system had the third-lowest score out of 52 systems.
The Philippines’ latest score remained below the global average of 65.6 this year.
It was also the only pension system in the East and Southeast Asian region that received a “D” grade. Other countries that received a “D” are India, Turkiye, and Argentina.
A “D” grade or a score of between 35 and 49 means the pension system has some desirable features but also major weaknesses that need to be addressed. Without these improvements, the efficacy and sustainability of the pension system are “in doubt,” the report said.
The Philippines has two main pension funds — the Social Security System (SSS) for private workers and the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) for government workers.
According to the report, the Philippines’ adequacy score improved to 44.7 in 2026 from 40.6 in 2025 but was still below the global average of 67.1.
The Philippines’ sustainability score fell to 63.9 from 64.4 but above the global average of 55.6.
For integrity, the Philippines’ score inched up to 35.7 from 33.2. However, this was significantly lower than the global average score of 77.1.
“The Philippines needs to strengthen governance, transparency, and retirement adequacy. A low integrity score points to the importance of building public confidence in how pension funds are managed, although improving integrity alone will not address the system’s other weaknesses,” Ser Percival K. Peña-Reyes, a senior research fellow at the Ateneo Center for Economic Research and Development, said in a Viber message.
He said there should be pension system reforms to strengthen accountability and transparency, improve pension adequacy, expand coverage, develop private retirement savings, and strengthen long-term sustainability.
“The main obstacles are fragmented pension arrangements, limited retirement savings, gaps in coverage, and weaknesses in governance and accountability,” he said.
Mr. Peña-Reyes pushed for a review of existing laws covering the SSS, GSIS, and the Personal Equity and Retirement Account (PERA).
“We should continue strengthening SSS financial sustainability, contribution compliance, and coverage of self-employed and informal sector workers. Reforms must balance better benefits with contribution affordability,” he said.
He noted the government should make PERA “more attractive through simpler administration, wider investment choices, stronger public awareness, and more effective tax incentives.”
“All told, the Philippines needs to move beyond periodic pension increases toward comprehensive pension reform. Improving integrity and public trust, expanding coverage, and making retirement benefits adequate and sustainable should be the priorities,” Mr. Peña-Reyes said, adding that Singapore offers a useful regional reference for disciplined fund governance and structured retirement savings.
Meanwhile, IBON Foundation Executive Director Jose Enrique “Sonny” A. Africa said the country’s pension system’s relatively high sustainability score was a “back-handed criticism” on how low benefits and coverage remain.
“With around 12 million Filipinos over 60 years old, some two out of five still do not have pensions. For those with pensions, the average P5,700 monthly for SSS pensioners and P1,000 monthly for indigents is grossly inadequate. Working children, relatives and charity remain the real pension system in the country,” he said in a Viber message.
Mr. Africa said the government should establish universal social pensions.
“Every elderly Filipino should be guaranteed a basic pension regardless of employment history. This directly addresses the shallow benefits and exclusion of informal workers, unpaid family workers and women who spent much of their lives doing unpaid care work,” he said.
LONG-TERM CHALLENGES
Overall, the Netherlands topped the Global Pension Index with a score of 85.8, followed by Denmark, Iceland, Singapore, Israel and Australia. These six retirement income systems were given an “A” grade, which means they “deliver good benefits, is sustainable and has a high level of integrity.”
Among East Asia and Southeast Asia, Singapore’s pension system was the only one with an “A” score, followed by Hong Kong SAR with a “B” grade.
China and Malaysia got “C+” grades, while Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia received “C” scores.
Globally, the Marsh report showed that falling fertility rates and rising life expectancies will impact the design and long-term sustainability of pension systems.
“The decisions we make today to build sustainable systems will have a profound impact on people’s future financial security. Increasing longevity is too significant to ignore, with wide-ranging impacts on individuals, governments, economies, and societies. The time to act is now,” Pat Tomlinson, president and chief executive officer of Marsh People and Investments, said in a press release.
Mona Naqvi, managing director at CFA Institute Research and Policy Center, said retirement systems face the same long-term challenge of delivering reliable income amid a shift in demographics and change in markets.
“No single policy or investment decision can achieve that. It takes sound system design and governance, alongside careful oversight of investments by those with a fiduciary duty to savers and retirees. The test is whether those decisions work together to serve people throughout retirement, and remain sound for the generations that follow,” she said.
According to the report, pension systems should establish clear objectives, prioritize funding of future retirement obligations, and increase flexibility in pension product design and retirement age structures.
“The right approach for one country, one system, or even one individual will not be the right approach for another. But what every system shares is the need to adapt. Retirement design must become more flexible — in when people access income, in how products are structured, and in how we think about the line between work and retirement. That flexibility is no longer optional,” Tim Jenkins, lead author of the report and partner at Marsh Investments and Retirement, said. — Aaron Michael C. Sy