[attachmentid=8465290]
most of the fund I know are benchmark against invested equity market index, except some using annualized return benchmark.
for fair comparison, we should include the KLCI index as well, and here is what the number try to tell us:
1. if you (100%) invest in local stock market like KLCI index fund, after 3 yrs you get negative return with 8% volatility.
2. PRS core fund structure of equity/bond is designed such a way to reduce volatility and smooth out the longterm return through up-and-down cycle.
3. example core growth fund (70%) reduce volatility to 6%, yet get 5% positive annualized return.
4. you can choose to lower the volatility further to 5%, with core moderate fund (60%), still get 4% positive annualized return.
5. if you are at the end of your investment plan and going to cash out soon, core conservative fund (20%) will give lowest volatility of 2%, which give you the enhanced fixed income return of 3%.
PRS is design in a way that you still need have some DIY effort over the default core fund:
step 1. age before 40: core growth fund
step 2. age 40-50: core moderate fund
step 3. age after 50: core conservative fund
unless we have introduce "PRS core target date fund" which will auto the three steps for you.
That is what majority of funds are being using. Benchmark against KLCI or some other indices.
But as for PRS funds, benchmark against KLCI is not accurate IMHO because PRS funds are supposed to supplement to EPF and is hoping to match or beat EPF returns. Otherwise, it is just a redundant of existing funds in the market.
Just my two cents.