Countries with the Most Pension Fund Assets (2026 Update)

The 22 largest pension markets in the world held about $68.3 trillion in assets at the end of 2025, according to the Thinking Ahead Institute's Global Pension Assets Study. The United States accounted for 65.8% of that total, which means one country holds roughly two of every three pension dollars. The picture changes when assets are compared with the size of each economy, where Denmark, Iceland, Switzerland, Canada, and the Netherlands lead. This article explains how the rankings are built, why the numbers differ between sources, and what large pension assets do and do not say about retirement security.

Educational only, not financial advice. Investing involves risk of loss, and past performance does not guarantee future results. This article describes how pension systems are measured and does not recommend any product, plan, or strategy. Consult a licensed professional for personal decisions.

Key takeaways

• The 22 largest pension markets held about $68.3 trillion at the end of 2025, up 9.6% from $62.3 trillion a year earlier (Thinking Ahead Institute, a research group founded by the consultancy WTW).
• The United States held 65.8% of that total, followed by Canada (5.5%) and Japan (5.0%). The US, Japan, Canada, and the United Kingdom together held 81.0%.
• Relative to GDP, Denmark (204%), Iceland (188%), Switzerland (165%), Canada (158%), and the Netherlands (150%) lead, based on OECD data for the end of 2024.
• Germany, France, and Italy show small funded pension assets because most retirement income comes from public pay-as-you-go systems, not because retirees are poorly provided for.
• Large asset totals measure savings, not adequacy. A country can hold huge assets while many of its workers have little or nothing set aside.

Which countries have the most pension assets?

Two main sources track pension assets across countries. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) collects data from national supervisors on "asset-backed pension arrangements," meaning accounts and funds where money is accumulated to pay future benefits. The Thinking Ahead Institute (TAI) covers 22 markets, which it calls the P22, and publishes an annual study that is the source of the $68.3 trillion headline.

The table below uses the OECD's preliminary data for the end of 2024, the most recent country-by-country table available in full. Rankings are by US dollar value, with assets as a share of GDP alongside.

Rank	Country	Assets, end-2024 (US$ billion)	Assets as % of GDP	Notes
1	United States	42,902	146.9%	Includes individual retirement accounts and 401(k) plans
2	Canada	3,543	157.6%	OECD estimate; data to Q3 2024
3	United Kingdom	2,936	78.0%	Pension funds; data to Q3 2024
4	Australia	2,392	135.1%	Superannuation; data to June 2024
5	Netherlands	1,771	150.3%	Pension funds and premium pension institutions
6	Switzerland	1,504	164.8%	OECD estimate
7	Japan	1,141	29.3%	Pension funds only; excludes the public reserve fund GPIF
8	Denmark	846	204.0%	Pension funds and insurance contracts
9	Sweden	671	114.8%
10	India	558	14.4%	OECD estimate; non-OECD jurisdiction
11	South Korea	553	31.9%
12	Brazil	461	24.3%	Non-OECD jurisdiction
13	France	390	12.9%	OECD estimate; pension funds and a public-service scheme
14	Israel	380	69.3%
15	Mexico	370	22.1%	Personal plans only
16	Germany	284	6.4%	Occupational pension funds only

Source: OECD, Pension Markets in Focus, Preliminary 2024 Data, June 2025. Figures are preliminary and were revised in the full 2025 edition.

Iceland, with $63 billion in pension assets and a ratio of 188.4% of GDP, does not appear in the dollar ranking but is second only to Denmark relative to the size of its economy. Denmark's 204% was the highest in the OECD's table, and the OECD summary notes that Denmark had the largest pension assets relative to its economy, at over twice GDP.

How does the Thinking Ahead Institute count?

TAI's 2026 study estimates P22 assets of $68,274 billion at year-end 2025. Its shares of that total were 65.8% for the United States, 5.5% for Canada, and 5.0% for Japan. The study reports that Canada grew 12.0% in 2025 in US dollar terms, while the United States grew 9.7%, Japan 4.0%, and the United Kingdom 3.0%. Canada's rise moved it past Japan to second place, though growth rates measured in dollars partly reflect currency moves. Coverage of the report in European Pensions notes that the UK fell from second place in 2015 to fourth in 2025, with a 10-year compound growth rate in dollar terms of 1.4%, the second lowest among the 22 markets.

The seven largest markets, which TAI calls the P7 (Australia, Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States), hold 91% of the P22 total. TAI also estimates that another $3 trillion to $6 trillion sits in 195 other markets, and it computes a Gini coefficient of 79% for global pension assets, a measure of how concentrated they are. The Gini scale runs from zero (perfect equality) to 100% (one country holds everything), so 79% indicates heavy concentration. You can read the summary in the Thinking Ahead Institute's 2026 study.

Why do the numbers differ between sources?

If you compare the OECD table with other publications, you will find mismatches. Most come from definitions rather than errors.

• What counts as a pension asset. The OECD includes individual retirement accounts and other personal plans but excludes reserves held by public pay-as-you-go schemes. Some countries report only occupational pension funds. Germany's figure in the OECD table, for example, covers only certain occupational vehicles, and France's figure covers pension funds plus a public-service scheme.
• Public reserve funds. The OECD's full 2025 report put pension assets in its member countries at $69.8 trillion at the end of 2024, of which $63.1 trillion was managed by pension providers and $6.7 trillion was held in public pension reserve funds. Japan's GPIF is in the second group, which is why Japan's row in the table above looks small.
• Reference dates. Australia's data run to June 2024, and Canada's and the United Kingdom's run to the third quarter of 2024. Markets moved after those dates.
• Exchange rates. Assets are converted to US dollars, so a stronger dollar shrinks foreign assets on paper even when local-currency balances rise.
• Preliminary versus final data. The OECD's preliminary table showed US assets of $42.9 trillion at the end of 2024, and the figures were revised when the full report followed, so the two editions do not match exactly.

For the United States, a third source gives a different frame. The Investment Company Institute (ICI) publishes a broader total for US retirement assets that includes IRAs, employer-sponsored defined contribution plans, government and private-sector defined benefit plans, and annuity reserves. Because ICI includes annuity reserves and uses a later date than the OECD and TAI tables, its figure is higher.

Why does the United States hold two-thirds of the total?

Three things explain the US share: the size of its economy, the structure of its retirement system, and the strength of its stock market. Each deserves a closer look.

How did 401(k) plans change retirement saving?

The 401(k) is named for a section of the tax code added by the Revenue Act of 1978, and employers began using it as a savings plan in the early 1980s. It grew into the main workplace retirement vehicle. It shifted the investment risk from employers to workers. Under a traditional defined benefit (DB) plan, an employer promises a monthly income based on salary and years of service and bears the risk that investments underperform. Under a defined contribution (DC) plan such as a 401(k), the worker and employer contribute to an individual account, and the retirement income depends on how the investments perform. TAI reports that DC plans make up 72% of US pension assets and 63% of the P7 total.

Tax rules encourage the accumulation. Contributions to traditional accounts are usually made before income tax, growth is tax-deferred, and Roth versions allow tax-free withdrawals under certain conditions. A comparison of the two account types is in Roth IRA vs 401(k).

What does a big asset pool hide?

Aggregate assets say little about the typical household. The Federal Reserve's Survey of Consumer Finances shows that a large share of US families hold no retirement account at all, and that balances among those who do are very uneven. National totals in the tens of trillions of dollars therefore say little about the typical household, a pattern echoed in wealth inequality causes and data.

For a practical overview of how households approach planning, see how to actually plan for retirement. A related rule of thumb is explained in the 4% rule.

What happens when a private pension fails?

In the United States, a federal agency called the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) insures private-sector defined benefit plans. In fiscal year 2025, it covered about 30.0 million people across roughly 23,500 plans, of which 18.4 million were in single-employer plans and 11.1 million in multiemployer plans. The maximum guarantee for a 65-year-old in a single-employer plan that terminates in 2026 is $93,477 a year. State and local government plans are not insured by the PBGC, and neither are 401(k)s. A Congressional Research Service primer summarizes the details at EveryCRSReport.

Which countries have the most pension assets relative to GDP?

Ranking by share of GDP produces a different list. The top five in the OECD table are Denmark, Iceland, Switzerland, Canada, and the Netherlands. What these countries share is a system that sends most workers into funded occupational plans, either by law or by collective agreement.

Switzerland's design is the "three-pillar" system anchored in its constitution since 1972. The first pillar is the state pension, the second is compulsory occupational provision for most employees through funds regulated under the Federal Act on Occupational Old Age, Survivors' and Invalidity Pension Provision, and the third is voluntary private saving. The OECD describes Denmark as one of a small group of countries where private pensions are "quasi-mandatory" because collective agreements give them near-universal coverage.

Think of a funded pension as a reservoir and a pay-as-you-go (PAYG) pension as a river. In a reservoir, water collected in wet years is stored for dry ones. In a river, water flows straight through: today's workers pay for today's retirees, and nothing accumulates. Reservoirs show up in asset statistics. Rivers do not.

How does the Netherlands compare?

The Netherlands relies heavily on sector-wide occupational funds, held $1.77 trillion in pension assets at the end of 2024, and ranks first in the 2025 Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index with a score of 85.4 out of 100 (grade A). Iceland scored 84.0 and Denmark 82.3. The index covers 52 systems and grades them on adequacy, sustainability, and integrity. Singapore and Israel also earned A grades.

The OECD's Pensions at a Glance 2025 reports a net replacement rate for the Netherlands of 96% for average earners, one of the highest in the OECD, compared with an OECD average of about 63%. The replacement rate is pension income as a share of earnings before retirement.

The Dutch system is also in the middle of a major reform. The Future Pensions Act took effect on July 1, 2023, and requires funds to move from collective defined benefit schemes to age-independent defined contribution arrangements. The deadline for completing the transition is January 1, 2028, and some funds, such as ABP, plan to move earlier. The reform is technically complex, because converting the accrued rights of millions of members held in a $1.8 trillion system requires careful communication and regulatory approval.

How does Australia compare?

Australia's superannuation system is compulsory. The employer contribution rate rose from 11.5% to 12% on July 1, 2025. TAI reports that 90% of Australian pension assets are in defined contribution form. According to Australian Prudential Regulation Authority statistics, total superannuation assets were about A$4.4 trillion in March 2026, with roughly A$3.1 trillion in APRA-regulated funds and A$1.06 trillion in self-managed funds. The OECD table shows Australian assets at 135.1% of GDP.

What about Japan's GPIF?

Japan's Government Pension Investment Fund (GPIF) invests the reserves of the public pension system and is widely described in financial media as the world's largest pension fund. At the end of March 2025 it managed about ¥250 trillion, or roughly $1.7 trillion, according to reporting by AI-CIO. Norway's Government Pension Fund Global, which is technically a sovereign wealth fund, is the other contender for the title, a comparison discussed in countries with the largest sovereign wealth funds.

GPIF's fiscal year 2024 return, covering April 2024 to March 2025, was 0.71%. At March 31, 2025, its holdings were 27.64% domestic bonds, 24.37% foreign bonds, 24.05% foreign equities, and 23.94% domestic equities. Returns by quarter swung between a 4.31% gain and a 3.57% loss, a reminder that even a diversified fund of this scale can post negative results in a given quarter. Details are in the AI-CIO report.

Why does Japan face unusual demographic pressure?

Japan's 2025 census found that a record 29.4% of the population was aged 65 or older, up from 28.5% in 2020. Its total fertility rate fell to a record low of 1.15 in 2024, and South Korea's was 0.75 in 2024, up from 0.72 in 2023. Fewer workers per retiree strains pay-as-you-go finances. Japan's 2004 reform introduced a "macroeconomic slide," which holds benefit growth below wage and price growth to account for a shrinking workforce and rising life expectancy. The result is that benefits for future retirees will rise more slowly than the economy, a trade-off rather than a free fix. A ranking of the oldest populations is in countries with the oldest populations, and the other side of the trend appears in countries with the lowest birth rates.

Why do Germany, France, and Italy look so small?

Germany's occupational pension funds hold about 6.4% of GDP, France's pension vehicles about 12.9%, and Italy's about 11.7%. These numbers do not mean the countries have weak pensions. They mean the main pension is paid from current taxes and contributions through public PAYG systems, which the OECD table excludes from asset-backed arrangements.

Feature	Funded system	Pay-as-you-go system
Where contributions go	Invested in an account or fund	Paid out to current retirees
What shows up in asset rankings	Large balances	Little or nothing
Main risk	Market returns and fees	Shrinking workforce relative to retirees
Examples	Netherlands, Australia, Denmark, Canada (in part)	Germany, France, Italy (mainly)
Response to aging	Balances help, but returns vary	Benefits or contributions must adjust

Neither design is categorically better. A funded system can be hit by a market crash just before retirement, and a PAYG system can be hit by demographic change. Many countries use a mix. The related measure of overall system quality is covered in countries with the best pension systems.

How are pension funds invested?

Asset allocation varies more than most people assume. TAI reports that the average allocation of the seven largest markets at the end of 2025 was 48% equities, 31% bonds, 19% other assets such as real estate and private investments, and 3% cash. The US and Australia hold more equities than the rest of the P7, while Japan, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom hold more bonds. A 60% global equities and 40% global bonds reference portfolio returned 15.9% in dollar terms in 2025.

The OECD's data on 2024 show how widely returns can vary. Nominal investment returns were about 9% in Australia, 8.9% in the United States, and 8.2% in the Netherlands, and pension plans achieved positive real returns in 27 of 29 reporting OECD countries. Global equities, measured by the MSCI World Index, rose by close to 20% that year. Bond holdings had mixed results because long-term yields did not fall in step with short-term rates. The relationship between bond prices and rates is explained in how bond prices move with interest rates.

Over the past decade, DC assets in the P7 grew at 9.4% a year and DB assets at 3.2%, according to TAI, which is why DC's share keeps rising. In the UK, DC assets made up about 40% of the total, up from 18% in 2020, as older DB schemes mature and de-risk.

How are governments changing pension systems now?

As defined contribution plans grow, the policy question is shifting from "how do we get people to save?" to "how do we turn savings into income that lasts?" Saving is like filling a fuel tank. Retirement income is the harder problem of deciding how fast to drive so the tank lasts for a lifetime of unknown length. TAI's 2025 Global DC Peer Study found that 60% of leading DC organizations see retirement income as the main challenge of the next decade, because DC systems were built to help people accumulate, not to convert balances into a reliable income for life.

Several countries are responding in different ways:

• United Kingdom: Regulators have proposed a stronger "Value for Money" framework that would require schemes to report investment performance, costs, and service quality consistently, with expectations of action, including consolidation, where value is poor. Related proposals on default retirement pathways and small-pot consolidation are expected in the Pension Schemes Bill.
• Australia: Policymakers are consulting on a retirement measurement and reporting framework to help compare retirement income products offered by superannuation funds.
• Netherlands: The Future Pensions Act is replacing collective defined benefit schemes with age-independent defined contribution schemes, with a transition deadline of January 1, 2028.
• Japan: The macroeconomic slide, introduced in the 2004 reform, trims benefit growth automatically as the workforce shrinks and life expectancy rises.

Each reform trades something. Moving risk onto individuals lowers the cost to sponsors and makes benefits portable, but it exposes retirees to market timing and longevity risk, meaning the chance of outliving savings. Pooling those risks again, through annuities or collective schemes, costs money and reduces flexibility. The underlying debate is the same one that separates the funded and pay-as-you-go models above: who bears the risk, and how it is shared across generations.

What do the rankings miss?

A country's total pension assets are a poor guide to the retirement security of its people. At least four gaps stand out.

Coverage. Pension assets say nothing about who is covered. The International Labour Organization's World Social Protection Report 2024-26 estimated that 52.4% of the world's population received at least one social protection benefit in 2023, up from under 43% in 2015, leaving roughly 3.8 billion people without any. Coverage in low-income countries was about 9.7% and had barely changed in years. These figures cover all types of social protection, not only pensions, but they indicate how thin formal provision is outside wealthy economies.

Adequacy. A large pool can still produce small individual benefits if it is spread across many people or if contributions were low. Replacement rates show the more relevant ratio of income after retirement to income before it.

Sustainability. Defined benefit promises can outrun the money set aside for them. The PBGC's existence is a reminder that private plans fail, and state and local government plans in the United States sit outside that insurance.

Inequality within countries. The same system can deliver comfortable retirements for high earners and little for low earners. TAI's 79% Gini coefficient measures concentration between countries, and uneven US account balances show concentration inside them. Tax rules shape both the incentive to save and what retirees keep, a theme in countries with the highest income tax rates.

Pension funds are also major investors in listed markets, a link explored in countries with the largest stock markets. The wealthiest individuals, whose fortunes often sit outside these systems, are covered in countries with the most billionaires.

Frequently asked questions

Q: What is the difference between defined benefit and defined contribution pensions?
A: A defined benefit (DB) plan promises a specific retirement income, usually based on salary and years of service, and the sponsor bears the investment risk. A defined contribution (DC) plan sets contributions and leaves the retirement income to investment performance, so the worker bears the risk. TAI reports that DC assets in the seven largest markets grew at 9.4% a year over the past decade, against 3.2% for DB.

Q: What is a pension replacement rate?
A: A replacement rate is retirement income as a share of earnings before retirement. The OECD's Pensions at a Glance 2025 reports an average net replacement rate of about 63% across OECD countries for average earners with full careers in mandatory schemes, with the Netherlands near 96%. The figures assume a full working career and cover mandatory schemes only, so voluntary savings can change the result.

Q: Can pension funds fail?
A: Yes. Underfunded defined benefit plans can fall short of their promises. In the United States, the PBGC insures private-sector DB plans up to legal limits, which for single-employer plans that terminate in 2026 means $93,477 a year at age 65. State and local government plans are not covered by the PBGC. Defined contribution accounts carry market risk and are not guaranteed.

Q: How do aging populations affect pensions?
A: Older populations mean fewer workers per retiree, which puts pressure on pay-as-you-go systems. Japan, where 29.4% of residents were 65 or older in 2025 and the fertility rate was 1.15 in 2024, responded with automatic adjustments that slow benefit growth. Funded systems are less directly exposed, but they depend on investment returns and on retirees spending down balances over longer lifespans.

Q: Why are Germany's pension assets so small if its retirees are well provided for?
A: Because the OECD statistic counts assets accumulated in funds, and Germany's core pension is paid from current contributions and taxes. Occupational pension funds hold about 6.4% of GDP, but the public pension is the main source of retirement income for most Germans. Low assets in this ranking reflect system design more than generosity.

Q: What is the difference between mandatory and voluntary systems?
A: Mandatory or quasi-mandatory systems, as in the Netherlands, Denmark, Australia, and Switzerland, enroll most workers by law or collective agreement and tend to build large pools relative to GDP. Voluntary systems, as in much of the United States, depend on employer offers and worker choices, and participation varies with income. The trade-off is between broad coverage and individual flexibility.

The takeaway

Pension asset rankings tell you where savings have accumulated, and the answer is overwhelmingly a handful of wealthy countries led by the United States. They do not tell you which country's retirees are best off, because countries with small funded assets, such as Germany and France, rely on public systems that the statistics leave out. Relative to GDP, countries that enroll most workers in occupational plans, led by Denmark, Iceland, Switzerland, Canada, and the Netherlands, have built the largest reserves. The common challenge is demographic: fewer workers per retiree will test both reservoir-style and river-style systems, and the reforms underway in the Netherlands, Japan, and the United Kingdom show governments adjusting in different ways. For the roughly 3.8 billion people without any social protection, the more urgent question is whether a system exists at all.

Sources

• Thinking Ahead Institute, Global Pension Assets Study 2026, February 2026, and coverage in European Pensions.
• OECD, Pension Markets in Focus, Preliminary 2024 Data, June 2025, and OECD Pensions at a Glance 2025.
• Congressional Research Service, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC): A Primer.
• AI-CIO, GPIF fiscal 2024 results, July 2025.
• Mercer and CFA Institute, Global Pension Index 2025; International Labour Organization, World Social Protection Report 2024-26; Federal Reserve, Survey of Consumer Finances 2022.

Related Reading

• Countries with the Highest National Debt
• How Demographics Will Reshape the Global Economy
• Countries with the Highest Life Expectancy