Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 100

The comprehensive income product for retirement

[Editor's note: The words in Jeremy's heading and their abbreviation, CIPR (pronounced 'sipper'), come from the Financial System Inquiry and they are quickly becoming part of the superannuation industry lexicon. We need another word or abbreviation. Such a clunky set of letters will do nothing to encourage engagement with post-retirement products. Suggestions welcome.]


The retirement income stream market in Australia is unusual by global standards, being dominated by the ‘balanced’ account-based pension (ABP). It has usually been recommended to investors on the basis of underlying investment choice, flexibility, control and liquidity.

As observed by the Financial System Inquiry (FSI) in its final report, and made clear by their impairment during the GFC and in its aftermath, the average ‘balanced’ ABP can’t adequately manage the unique risks of retirement. It should be viewed as part of any retirement portfolio, rather than the entire solution.

So it makes sense that the FSI recommended that all large APRA-regulated super funds ‘pre-select’ a comprehensive income product for retirement (CIPR) that addresses the need for retirees to have:

  • high income
  • risk management features
  • flexibility

The FSI believed that this requirement is likely to be satisfied by using a combination of products, starting with the ABP. This was illustrated in the FSI’s final report as follows:

Desired features of retirement income products

JC Figure1 130315

JC Figure1 130315

The final report suggested the potential for a wide range of CIPRs which, in addition to the existing ABPs and annuity products, included combinations with:

  • deferred lifetime annuities (a product commonly used overseas, but not yet here)
  • group self-annuitisation schemes (GSAs) (a new concept)
  • deferred GSAs and
  • other future innovations.

Making the comprehensive income product more understandable

One challenge faced by the broad, non-prescriptive CIPR concept is that any product or portfolio will have to be easily understood and evaluated by fund members. To provide guidance, minimise subjectivity and promote more consistency of retiree outcomes, we might wish to consider the use of a balanced scorecard approach. The scorecard would assign a qualitative rating to each strategy or feature addressing the three CIPR requirements.

The scorecard could be developed by APRA using its standards-making power under broad principles that could be set out in the SIS Act. This process would allow for appropriate consultation with the industry. Designing the scorecard would, however, involve making some qualitative decisions about the differences between certain retirement income strategies. For example, a core principle should be that an investment strategy or asset allocation alone does not satisfactorily deal with longevity risk. Higher expected returns should be a positive, but income volatility should lower the rating. Similarly, CIPRs that did not have an express inflation management strategy or a means for combating sequencing risk would also get lower scores under the balanced scorecard idea.

Using a scorecard would enable easy comparison for retiring fund members and their advisers, and provide some regulatory guidance, without reducing the ability of fund trustees to tailor their offer to the specific needs of their own members (eg taking into account different demographic factors and the like). The balanced scorecard would essentially operate as a ‘nudge’, using a transparent rating system to influence the behaviour of product providers and retirees alike.

Recognise every retirement is different

To take our retirement income system to the next stage of its evolution, the CIPR concept must be impactful, while at the same time allowing tailoring, innovation and the accommodation of different demographics, account balances and so on. After all, every retirement will be different.

It also needs to be palatable. Given that workers are already forced to save some of their own wages through compulsory superannuation contributions, further compulsion is unwarranted. Murray has highlighted though, that the system is letting retirees down in leaving them exposed to risks that they cannot manage on their own.

Disclosure of the ratings to consumers in a meaningful way could be key to the success of the concept. Getting the disclosure right will involve attention to other global examples and, ultimately, consumer testing. Something similar to the ENERGY STAR® ratings used for new electrical appliances in Australia might be a start. Ideally, the rating system would be something that consumers will understand and trust.

If done properly, it should be possible for the scorecard to highlight trade-offs between risk management, flexibility and returns. If retirees, as consumers, come to understand that they cannot have the highest income with full flexibility and be protected from every risk, then advisers and funds can have a discussion about the mix that they provide.

The scorecard is likely to be both informative and slightly normative in effect. Funds and product makers are likely to respond to the incentive to seek higher, rather than lower, ratings. A low-scoring CIPR would still be compliant and there would be nothing preventing retirees from investing in it. Retirees might be advised to opt for a low-scoring CIPR because they have, for example, substantial assets, an expected inheritance or a longevity product in another structure. Similarly, the scorecard would not supplant advice and is really a ‘labelling’ idea. It would necessarily be only part of the process of determining the appropriate retirement strategy for a retiree. There is no silver bullet solution in retirement.

More choice for retiring members

There is only upside in introducing CIPRs. A CIPR simply provides more choice for retiring members. Super funds will be free to retain their existing range of retirement options and to introduce new products alongside CIPRs. Retirees would have no obligation to participate in a CIPR. In every way a CIPR would be a ‘choice’ product, especially when compared with MySuper. Whereas MySuper requires a young, typically less-interested worker to do nothing or opt-out, a ‘nudged’ CIPR requires a mature, engaged retiree to opt-in. This is a key point.

It is a well-recognised feature of pension systems around the world that a retirement solution put forward by the fund itself carries with it an implicit recommendation that it is appropriate. This, again, positions the CIPR as a useful policy initiative. Fund trustees will be aware of the duty of care involved. The underlying policy purpose of the CIPR concept is to provide better risk management for retirees than is currently being afforded to them.

The retirement phase is the remaining aspect of super that needs to be brought into the 21st century. If the idea of some sort of qualitative filter or signal, such as the balanced scorecard, is embraced by the industry, then the CIPR might just be the springboard for super to become recognised as the world’s leading retirement income system.


Jeremy Cooper is Chairman, Retirement Income at Challenger Limited, former Chairman of the Super System Review (the Cooper Review) and Deputy Chairman of ASIC from 2004 to 2009.

July 11, 2017

I came back to this article because the real issue is Superfunds need to start focusing on the pension phase not the accumulation (which is the easier solution). I still do no see innovation here,and in fact the system is being questioned whether it is capable of being an alternative to the government pension in the majority of situations.

Tony R
March 17, 2015

All very interesting but no-one seems to mention that all Australians already have access to a default 'CIPR'. It's guaranteed for life and indexed. It's called the Age Pension.
At current interest rates, the full Age Pension for a couple is valued at over $900,000. Not a bad base to build on with a flexible Account Based Pension to provide discretionary funding and quality of lifestyle. Add a $250k ABP and you have the best of both worlds.

March 17, 2015

i'd say the average Cuffelinks reader won't be entitled to the the Age Pension when they reach super preservation age, and even those who are, won't find $338 a week adequate.

Have you seriously thought about what it would be like to live on $20k a year for 25 years in retirement. That's most people's idea of penury.

And isn't that the whole point of our super system to replace all or most of the pension, in time?

We need to stop treating the age pension like a birthright and restore its (sustainable) position as a welfare safety net.

The average taxpayer finds the industry's notion of the age pension as a cornerstone risk-free asset or free option quite morally repugnant, i can assure you of that.

March 16, 2015

I note that some super funds and a peak body or two are (deliberately?) mischaracterising this FSI recommendation as requiring trustees to default members into a certain product or portfolio, which is not the case at all.

David Murray was abundantly clear that he was recommending an 'opt-in' pre-selection where the member had to make a conscious choice to invest in the CIPR when s/he reached preservation age.

I find it very curious that the big super funds have not embraced this idea as it is grounded in commonsense and is simply making sure members have more choice beyond the current account-based pension. How can this be a bad thing?

Or are they irked at being told they're not doing a good enough job when members reach retirement age?

March 15, 2015

How about Retirement Income Product or RIP?
At least that will get people's attention.

Len Williams
March 13, 2015

Back in 2007 when a financial advisor put the surplus from a house sale into an annuity I was not all that keen. However, since that time, I feel it has worked well with an existing allocated pension to give a reasonable amount of flexibilty in deciding income requirements.
In regards to CIPR, perhaps the inference is that's how one should draw down; in small sips.

David Brown
March 13, 2015

well at least "Sipper" sounds better than "Kipper" - as they say - better than a slap in the face with a wet kipper.....

I agree that we have a duty to the system to develop something truly world-beating to top off, complete and complement our system. However, all the above suggestions are quite expensive and potentially complex. Difficult to boil down to a single "star rating". However, the sooner we agree on what our Kipper/Sipper looks like - not to mention - sounds like... the better we will be at ultimately determining the sort of investment strategies that will best land the correct lump sum at retirement - the point of conversion into a CIPR. Without this we have no way of knowing how "successful" our accumulation system has been to date. I would suggest that aside from the fact that contributions have enlarged the system to its vast quantity - but before we slap ourselves on the back and say what a good job we have done investing - we should first count what it has actually bought us. Bring on the CIPR debate - we have no benchmark of success without it.

Jeremy Cooper
March 13, 2015

A new name is essential. 'CIPR' is a crock. It's pronounced 'SIPPER'. The letter 'C' plays the same role as the 'C' in cigar.


Leave a Comment:



Retirement: Making income the outcome

Retirement income products - what's ideal?

Schemes designed to deal with longevity risk


Most viewed in recent weeks

Unexpected results in our retirement income survey

Who knew? With some surprise results, the Government is on unexpected firm ground in asking people to draw on all their assets in retirement, although the comments show what feisty and informed readers we have.

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

Three all-time best tables for every adviser and investor

It's a remarkable statistic. In any year since 1875, if you had invested in the Australian stock index, turned away and come back eight years later, your average return would be 120% with no negative periods.

The looming excess of housing and why prices will fall

Never stand between Australian households and an uncapped government programme with $3 billion in ‘free money’ to build or renovate their homes. But excess supply is coming with an absence of net migration.

Five stocks that have worked well in our portfolios

Picking macro trends is difficult. What may seem logical and compelling one minute may completely change a few months later. There are better rewards from focussing on identifying the best companies at good prices.

Six COVID opportunist stocks prospering in adversity

Some high-quality companies have emerged even stronger since the onset of COVID and are well placed for outperformance. We call these the ‘COVID Opportunists’ as they are now dominating their specific sectors.

Latest Updates


10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?


Sean Fenton on marching to your own investment tune

Is it more difficult to find stocks to short in a rising market? What impact has central bank dominance had over stock selection? How do you combine income and growth in a portfolio? Where are the opportunities?


D’oh! DDO rules turn some funds into a punching bag

The Design and Distribution Obligations (DDO) come into effect in two weeks. They will change the way banks promote products, force some small funds to close to new members and push issues into the listed space.


Dividends, disruption and star performers in FY21 wrap

Company results in FY21 were generally good with some standout results from those thriving in tough conditions. We highlight the companies that delivered some of the best results and our future  expectations.

Fixed interest

Coles no longer happy with the status quo

It used to be Down, Down for prices but the new status quo is Down Down for emissions. Until now, the realm of ESG has been mainly fund managers as 'responsible investors', but companies are now pushing credentials.

Investment strategies

Seven factors driving growth in Managed Accounts

As Managed Accounts surge through $100 billion for the first time, the line between retail, wholesale and institutional capabilities and portfolios continues to blur. Lower costs help with best interest duties.


Reader Survey: home values in age pension asset test

Read our article on the family home in the age pension test, with the RBA Governor putting the onus on social security to address house prices and the OECD calling out wealthy pensioners. What is your view?



© 2021 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.