A 2011 commentary argued MPF’s biggest winners were the MPF companies and its biggest losers low-income workers — “after all the deductions, little is left; how will they live out their days?” Ten years of contributions roughly beat inflation, but equity funds’ ~5% average annual return was nothing stellar.
Because MPF alone was never going to fund retirement. Retirement takes personal saving plus the right investments. Some suggested adding Brazil or Russia funds — strong growth drivers but volatile, and single-country funds break diversification rules.
The piece argued it all came down to whether investor education was good enough. Knowing diversification and watching fees is what keeps you on target.
With small contributions, low-fee funds matter even more. Compare MPF funds on expense ratios.

A December 2010 commentary argued that with Hong Kong’s population...

Why did a 2011 commentary oppose easing early MPF withdrawals? A 2011...
As the first half of 2026 draws to a close, Hong Kong’s Mandatory...