Across global pension funds, one truth is becoming increasingly clear: administration cost on its own tells don’t tell a complete story. What matters, especially as defined contribution (DC) systems mature, is the value those costs deliver in terms of service quality, operational efficiency, and member outcomes.
Recent CEM research comparing pension administration across the UK, Canada, the Netherlands, the U.S., and Australia illustrates this. After adjusting for scale, labour markets, and cost of living, administration costs still vary by more than 2x between jurisdictions. The reason is not accounting inconsistencies, it is conscious choices in service model design. Some systems prioritise efficiency and automation, delivering “core” services at very low cost. Others invest heavily in member engagement, governance, contact centres, and digital tools to deliver an “enhanced” service model, accepting higher costs in exchange for improved member experience and support during complex life events such as retirement.
Importantly, the research shows that neither approach is better. But it does reinforce a critical point for pension executives worldwide: without credible benchmarking, it is impossible to know whether your administration costs are high, low, or exactly right for the service you provide.
That challenge becomes even more acute in DC systems. Unlike DB plans, some DC administrators operate in competitive environments, manage frequent member transactions, support more complex products, and increasingly serve members through both accumulation and decumulation. Expectations from regulators, employers, and members are rising in many markets while scrutiny on operational efficiency is intensifying.
This is where DC administration benchmarking moves from being a retrospective reporting exercise to a strategic management tool.
A global benchmark built for DC administrators
In 2025, CEM launched a new Global DC Administration Benchmarking Subscription. Built on more than 25 years of global pension administration data and methodologies, the subscription allows DC administrators to assess cost, service levels, staffing, and operating models side‑by‑side with relevant international peers.
Participants receive a detailed management report, activity level cost and service comparisons, and access to a secure digital portal where insights can be explored. The benchmark spans more than 100 metrics across the full member journey, enabling leaders to understand where they are investing, why costs differ, and how service outcomes compare.
Crucially, the benchmark is not about identifying a single “right” service model. Instead, it provides a clear, evidence based roadmap for improvement, helping plans demonstrate value-for-money to Boards and regulators, make informed operating decisions, and learn directly from peers facing similar challenges.
Conclusion
With DC systems globally moving into more mature phases, serving growing retiree populations and more complex member needs, administration excellence is no longer optional. Benchmarking provides the transparency, context, and confidence pension leaders need to navigate these trade‑offs and continuously improve.
In a world where cost pressure and service expectations are both rising, the most important question is no longer “How much do we spend?”, but “Are we delivering the right value for our members?”