Winning and losing IGCs – class of 2017!

With (almost) all the known IGC reports in, it’s time to see how the reports of 2017 stacked up against 2016. Apologies that the links in the table don’t work, my formatting skills are poor and I’ve included the links in the Directory below this picture.

IGC2 all


Who are the winners?

In general , the standard of report writing has improved from 2016 to 2017 and two of last year’s losers (Aviva and Hargreaves Lansdown have been particularly improved.

The quality of the IGC reports from the legacy providers continues to impress, it is frustrating that the SIPP providers operating in the workplace are late in reporting (Hargeaves excepted).

Who are the losers?

The Scottish insurers continue to lag L&G and Aviva. It was a shame that Royal London’s report was a mess as they are clearly trying very hard to get it right. I ought to point out that Royal London appear to be working as hard as anyone and their team are engaging with value for money – read Julius Pursaill’s recent blog as evidence. All the same, the big four of Standard Life, Aegon, Scottish Widows and Royal London need to pull their socks up with April 2018 reporting.

Favourite report?

There were three reports that stood out this year. L&G for its pioneering work on disclosure, Aviva for its fresh feel and engagement with ESG and Virgin Money, who again show what can be done to engage jaded customers! For its improvement on last year, my favourite report in 2017 is Aviva’s.

What of the GAA’s?

The Governance Advisory Arrangements (GAA) are the IGC’s kid brothers and there are lots of them. I have written about them in 2016 and will do a round up of the 2017 reports in May. You can see who’s who by following this link (Guardian is now part of ReAssure). You can read about the destitute world of the GAA here.

What of the Master Trusts?

The Master Trusts (MT) also have to provide Chair statements but they have a longer timeframe. I will be trying to keep track of these statements but if any MT provider wants to send in their statements for scrutiny, I will be most grateful.

Like the IGCs, the MTs also have to report on value for money, unlike the IGCs , they don’t have budgets. We are relying on the IGCs to progress matters, not least because most of the energy is coming from the FCA (rather than the Pensions Regulator).

What about those links?

Here are the links that i couldn’t activate above.  Choose my review of the reports using this list (please report links that don’t work). The reports themselves are on the Tinyurl to the right.

If you know of an insurer that has published an IGC report that we do not track, please send details.


Royal London                                                   
Legal & General                                               
Scottish Widows                                              
Friends Life                                                       
Zurich Assurance                                             
Standard Life                                                    
Asset Managers
Legacy providers
Old Mutual                                                       
Abbey Life                                                        
Virgin Money                                                   


New breed SIPPs
HL Vantage                                                      
True Potential                                                  
Intelligent Money                                                      not published yet

About henry tapper

Founder of the Pension PlayPen,, partner of Stella, father of Olly . I am the Pension Plowman
This entry was posted in IGC, pensions and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Winning and losing IGCs – class of 2017!

  1. Alan Chaplin says:

    thanks henry – your reviews and the resulting comparison are very useful!

  2. henry tapper says:

    Very kind – the work is exhilarating as it opens doors to so much good stuff. I really am excited by the potential of IGCs and Trustees to make pensions better – we can’t allow their efforts to be ignored -even when they come across a little crap!

  3. Miranda Seath says:

    Really interesting comparison – and interesting to see who you think is getting it right and why!

  4. henry tapper says:

    Feel free to replicate with your work on platforms – generally results that can’t fit into a league table will not be read!

Leave a Reply