The difference between the best and worst performing 3a fund over five years? Over CHF 40,000 on the same contributions. Most people never check. Here's the data.
How 3a fund performance actually works in Switzerland
Pillar 3a fund performance is the net return your money earns after all fees are deducted. It's the only number that matters when comparing providers, and it varies wildly across the Swiss market.
Here's what most comparisons miss: raw fund returns mean nothing without context. A fund showing 8% returns with a 1.2% TER delivers less than one showing 7.5% with 0.39% total costs. Over decades, that gap compounds into tens of thousands of francs.
Performance also depends heavily on your equity allocation. A 99% stock fund will crush a 45% balanced fund over 20 years, but it'll also drop harder in crashes. Your time horizon determines which is right for you.
Which 3a funds performed best over five years?
Five-year returns strip out short-term noise and reveal genuine trends. Based on data from Swiss 3a providers, here's how the major funds stack up at comparable equity levels.
High equity (95-100% stocks), 5-year cumulative returns:
+52.75% cumulative (5Y). Passive index strategy. 0.44% all-in fee. 95% equities.
+51.49% cumulative (5Y). Passive index strategy. 0.41% all-in cost. 99% equities.
+7.93% annualized (5Y). Passive index. 0.39% all-in. 99% equities. Custom strategies available.
For comparison, a traditional bank fund like PostFinance Pension ESG 100 returned +50.03% over five years, but charges a 1.26% TER. That fee difference adds up: on CHF 100,000, you're paying CHF 1,260 per year instead of CHF 390-440.
The standout exception: Quantex Spectravest, an actively managed fund with 84% stocks, returned an impressive +76.50% over five years. At 1.18% TER, that's one of the rare active funds that justified its fees. But picking active winners in advance is nearly impossible, and most active funds don't repeat their outperformance.
Does low cost always mean high performance?
Not always, but it's the strongest predictor. Here's why.
Fund costs (TER + flat fees) directly reduce your returns every single year. A fund returning 7% gross with 0.40% costs delivers 6.60% net. The same market exposure at 1.20% costs delivers 5.80%. Over 30 years on CHF 7,258 yearly contributions, that 0.80% difference means roughly CHF 55,000 less in your retirement account.
- CHF 7,258 annual contributions for 30 years, 6% gross return:
- At 0.40% total cost: ~CHF 500,000 final value
- At 0.80% total cost: ~CHF 460,000 final value
- At 1.20% total cost: ~CHF 425,000 final value
- The cheapest vs. most expensive: CHF 75,000 difference
The data backs this up. Looking at comparable equity levels in the Swiss 3a market, low-cost passive providers (VIAC, Finpension, frankly) consistently cluster at the top of performance tables. Traditional bank funds with TERs above 1% consistently lag behind.
Check the current fee structures in our 3a fund comparison for the full picture.
How do the big three digital providers compare?
Finpension, VIAC, and frankly dominate the Swiss 3a investment fund market for good reason. Here's how they stack up on actual performance data.
Finpension
Strategy: Passive index funds (Swisscanto, UBS). No currency exchange fees.
- Equity range: 0-99%
- All-in cost: 0.39-0.42%
- Global 100 (1Y): +9.23% (per finpension factsheet data)
- Global 80 (1Y): +8.22%
- Global 60 (1Y): +7.20%
- Custom strategies: Yes, full flexibility
- Rebalancing: Weekly
Finpension's edge is the lowest all-in cost and no hidden currency exchange margins. For pure return optimization, it's hard to beat.
VIAC
Strategy: Passive index funds (UBS, Swisscanto, some ETFs).
- Equity range: 0-99%
- All-in cost: 0.00-0.44% (varies by strategy)
- Global 100 (5Y cumulative): +51.49%
- Global 80 (5Y cumulative): +49.02%
- Global 60 (5Y cumulative): +38.20%
- Custom strategies: Yes
- Rebalancing: Monthly
VIAC's track record is the longest among digital providers (since 2017). One catch: WIR Bank charges a margin on foreign currency transactions.
frankly
Strategy: Swisscanto funds (index and responsible options).
- Equity range: 15-95%
- All-in cost: 0.44-0.48%
- Extreme 95 Index (5Y cumulative): +52.75%
- Strong 75 Index (5Y cumulative): +41.45%
- Moderate 45 Index (5Y cumulative): +21.93%
- Custom strategies: No
- Rebalancing: Not disclosed
frankly is backed by Zürcher Kantonalbank. Its Extreme 95 Index fund has delivered the strongest raw 5-year cumulative return among the big three, though the 95% equity cap (vs. 99% at VIAC/Finpension) limits maximum exposure.
Strategy: Passive index funds (Swisscanto, UBS). No currency exchange fees.
- Equity range: 0-99%
- All-in cost: 0.39-0.42%
- Global 100 (1Y): +9.23% (per finpension factsheet data)
- Global 80 (1Y): +8.22%
- Global 60 (1Y): +7.20%
- Custom strategies: Yes, full flexibility
- Rebalancing: Weekly
Finpension's edge is the lowest all-in cost and no hidden currency exchange margins. For pure return optimization, it's hard to beat.
Strategy: Passive index funds (UBS, Swisscanto, some ETFs).
- Equity range: 0-99%
- All-in cost: 0.00-0.44% (varies by strategy)
- Global 100 (5Y cumulative): +51.49%
- Global 80 (5Y cumulative): +49.02%
- Global 60 (5Y cumulative): +38.20%
- Custom strategies: Yes
- Rebalancing: Monthly
VIAC's track record is the longest among digital providers (since 2017). One catch: WIR Bank charges a margin on foreign currency transactions.
Strategy: Swisscanto funds (index and responsible options).
- Equity range: 15-95%
- All-in cost: 0.44-0.48%
- Extreme 95 Index (5Y cumulative): +52.75%
- Strong 75 Index (5Y cumulative): +41.45%
- Moderate 45 Index (5Y cumulative): +21.93%
- Custom strategies: No
- Rebalancing: Not disclosed
frankly is backed by Zürcher Kantonalbank. Its Extreme 95 Index fund has delivered the strongest raw 5-year cumulative return among the big three, though the 95% equity cap (vs. 99% at VIAC/Finpension) limits maximum exposure.
The honest take: All three are excellent, and the performance differences between them are small. Your choice matters far less than picking any of the three over a traditional bank fund. If you're optimizing for the last 0.05%, Finpension has the lowest all-in cost. If you value the longest track record, VIAC. If you trust Zürcher Kantonalbank's backing, frankly.
What about traditional bank funds?
Traditional bank 3a funds are where most Swiss retirement money sits. And most of it is underperforming.
Here's the reality at comparable equity levels (45-50% stocks):
| Fund | Issuer | TER | 5Y Return | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| frankly Moderate 45 Index | frankly (ZKB) | 0.44% | +21.93% | Passive |
| LUKB Expert-Vorsorge 45 | LUKB | 0.60% | +24.16% | Active |
| Migros Bank Fonds 45 | Migros Bank | 0.92% | +18.82% | Active |
| PF Pension ESG 50 | PostFinance | 1.20% | +19.02% | Active |
| Raiffeisen Balanced | Raiffeisen | 1.10% | +5.86% | Active |
Raiffeisen's balanced fund returned just 5.86% over five years while charging 1.10% annually. That's barely keeping up with inflation. Compare that to frankly at 21.93% with lower fees, and you see why switching providers matters.
One exception worth noting: LUKB Expert-Vorsorge funds have consistently performed well among traditional banks, with reasonable fees (0.60-0.90% TER) and solid returns. They're the rare bank fund that competes.
Why does equity allocation matter more than provider choice?
This is the single biggest performance driver that most people get wrong. Your stock percentage determines your returns far more than which provider you pick.
VIAC fund performance by equity level (5-year cumulative):
- 99% stocks (Global 100): +51.49%
- 80% stocks (Global 80): +49.02%
- 60% stocks (Global 60): +38.20%
- 40% stocks (Global 40): +26.32%
- 20% stocks (Global 20): +15.76%
A 25-year-old picking 40% equities instead of 99% left about CHF 25,000 on the table over just five years on typical balances. Over 30+ years? The gap balloons.
How should you read 3a performance numbers?
Performance data can be misleading if you don't know what you're looking at. Here are the key things to check.
Net vs. gross returns
Always compare net returns after all fees. Some providers report gross returns (before TER), which flatters expensive funds. VIAC and Finpension report net, which is what you actually earn.
Cumulative vs. annualized
A "42% return" sounds amazing until you realize it's cumulative over three years (about 12.4% annualized). A "7% return" that's annualized is comparable. Make sure you're comparing the same format.
Time-weighted vs. money-weighted
Time-weighted return (TWR) measures the fund's performance independent of when you deposited money. It's the fair comparison metric. Money-weighted return (MWR) factors in your personal deposit timing. Both Finpension and VIAC show TWR. frankly shows only MWR, making direct comparison trickier.
Benchmark comparison
A passive fund tracking MSCI World should match the MSCI World return minus fees. If the gap is bigger than expected, something's off (tracking error, excessive cash drag, currency handling). Check the benchmark, not just the absolute number.
Common mistakes when comparing 3a fund performance
A 95% equity fund will always outperform a 45% fund in bull markets. That's not skill, it's just more risk. Always compare like-for-like: same equity percentage, same time period.
One-year returns are noise. A fund that returned 12% last year might have gotten lucky with sector bets. Focus on 3-5 year net returns and consistent tracking of benchmarks. Past performance genuinely does not predict future results.
VIAC charges a margin on foreign currency transactions through WIR Bank (up to 0.75%, though netting reduces it). This doesn't show up in the TER but reduces your returns on internationally invested portions. Finpension and frankly don't charge currency exchange fees.
"I'll switch later" is the most expensive sentence in Swiss retirement planning. Every year you leave money in a high-cost bank fund, you're compounding losses. Transferring takes 2-4 weeks and costs nothing. Do it.
My take on 3a fund performance
After building GetRates and analyzing every 3a fund on the Swiss market, here's what I've concluded: the provider matters less than people think, and the equity level matters more.
Finpension, VIAC, and frankly are all excellent. Their performance differences over five years amount to a few percentage points, mostly explained by small cost differences and currency handling. Pick any of the three and you're in the top tier.
What actually makes or breaks your retirement outcome is: (1) maximizing your equity allocation for your time horizon, (2) contributing the maximum every year, and (3) never panic-selling during drawdowns. These three factors dwarf any provider choice.
My own setup: maximum equity, lowest-cost passive funds, multiple accounts for tax-optimized withdrawals. Not exciting, but the math is crystal clear.
For a side-by-side look at all providers, use our pillar 3a comparison tool. It covers fees, returns, and features in one view.
Switzerland's FINMA oversees all pension fund providers, ensuring minimum diversification and operational standards for 3a products.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the best performing pillar 3a fund in Switzerland?
The best performing 3a funds over five years are the high-equity passive index funds from digital providers. frankly Extreme 95 Index (+52.75%), VIAC Global 100 (+51.49%), and Finpension Global 100 (~+47% cumulative) lead the pack. Among active funds, Quantex Spectravest stands out at +76.50% but with higher fees and less predictability.
How much return can I expect from a pillar 3a investment fund?
Expected long-term returns depend on your equity allocation. High-equity 3a funds (80-99% stocks) have historically delivered 5-8% annualized after fees over 5+ year periods. Balanced funds (40-60% stocks) typically return 3-5% annualized. These are averages across market cycles, including downturns.
Are Finpension, VIAC, or frankly better for performance?
All three deliver similar performance for comparable strategies. The differences come down to details: Finpension has the lowest all-in cost (0.39%), VIAC has the longest track record (since 2017), and frankly's Extreme 95 Index has the highest raw 5-year cumulative return. For pure cost optimization, Finpension edges ahead.
Should I choose an active or passive 3a fund?
Passive index funds win for most investors. Over 10-15 years, 80-90% of active Swiss 3a funds underperform their passive equivalents after fees. The rare exceptions (like Quantex Spectravest) are nearly impossible to identify in advance. Passive funds cost 0.39-0.48% versus 0.80-1.50% for active, and that fee gap compounds for decades.
How often should I check my 3a fund performance?
Once or twice a year is plenty. Monthly or weekly checking leads to emotional decisions, especially during market drops. Your 3a money is locked until retirement anyway. Check annually to ensure your fund still tracks its benchmark, review your equity allocation every few years, and otherwise let compounding do its work.
