Tuesday, February 17, 2026
Monday, February 16, 2026
New flight plan for CPF savings: Long overdue - but may not suit everyone
https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/new-flight-plan-for-cpf-savings-long-overdue-but-may-not-suit-everyone
2026-02-16
By--- Christopher Gee is deputy director (research) and senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, National University of Singapore.
=====
In his Budget 2026 speech, Prime Minister and Finance Minister Lawrence Wong announced that Central Provident Fund (CPF) members can expect a new investment scheme by 2028. Targeted at those who are able and willing to tolerate higher risk for higher returns, the scheme aims to grow retirement savings more effectively over members’ working lives.
The incoming scheme is likely to differ significantly from the existing CPF Investment Scheme (CPFIS), which is designed for members with the expertise, time and inclination to manage investments actively. But CPFIS today offers more than 700 products across a wide range of strategies. For many members, that breadth of choice can be intimidating. As American psychologist Barry Schwartz has argued through the “paradox of choice”, more choice can sometimes lead to poorer decisions and suboptimal outcomes.
With so many options, investing outcomes among CPFIS participants vary considerably. Between 2016 and 2024, around 491,000 CPFIS-OA investors recorded cumulative investment returns above 2.5 per cent per annum – beating the prevailing CPF Ordinary Account (OA) interest rate.
Over the same period, however, 192,000 investors recorded total annual returns below 2.5 per cent. Many of them are no longer active CPFIS investors, with zero CPFIS-OA holdings today.
While there is no publicly available information on comparable outcomes for CPFIS-SA investors over that period, it is likely that returns would also vary widely above or below the prevailing CPF Special Account (SA) interest rate of 4 per cent per annum.
Such dispersion matters. Over decades, differences in compounded returns can widen wealth inequality – especially when early setbacks in the accumulation phase leave some members further behind than those who were luckier, more astute, or both.
A life-cycle approach
CPF members will soon have a new option. The incoming scheme will likely be designed as a fuss-free, simplified investment mechanism that enables more personalised portfolio management over an investor’s lifetime, without requiring active decisions at every step.
Consider a CPF member in their mid-30s who meets the current CPFIS eligibility criteria and has 25 to 30 years of working life before reaching the CPF payout eligibility age, currently 65. With a longer horizon, the member could opt into a life-cycle fund under the incoming scheme that is more heavily weighted towards higher-return, higher-risk asset classes that may help hedge inflation, such as equities and commodities.
As the member draws nearer to retirement, the portfolio would be automatically rebalanced towards lower-volatility, lower-risk asset classes – or potentially shifted back into the CPF Special or Retirement accounts. The member would not need to take active steps to de-risk the portfolio and could benefit from time in the market during the long accumulation phase, continuing to dollar-cost average even through downturns.
Some older CPF members may also find the new scheme suitable. Those with other stable sources of income and who have already set aside their Full Retirement Sum could benefit from additional time in the market, while tailoring the scheme’s rebalancing and de-risking glidepath to their needs.
Some currently active CPFIS investors may also find it appropriate to shift into the incoming scheme, to benefit from lower costs and reduced need for active management.
Good option, but not for everyone
As at Sept 30, 2025, 1.63 million and 980,000 CPF members were eligible for CPFIS-OA and CPFIS-SA respectively, having the requisite investible savings in their OA and SA.
Members who decide to invest through the incoming scheme will be shifting savings from a risk-free asset into one that bears investment risk and fluctuates in value. CPF balances also benefit from floor interest rates that continue to be credited even through market downturns. Members with little tolerance for volatility – or any downside risk to their CPF savings – would be ill-advised to opt into the new scheme.
But for members who choose to opt in, the incoming scheme could be paired with life-course financial planning. PM Wong said the Government will help CPF members understand whether the new scheme is suitable for them. When it is launched in the first half of 2028, members could be offered access to independent financial planning as part of the outreach.
Suitability should be assessed holistically, taking into account members’ needs and resources beyond their CPF balances and age alone.
The incoming scheme is being introduced in response to the CPF Advisory Panel’s recommendation in August 2016 for a simple, low-fee investment scheme. The Ministry of Manpower and the CPF Board have taken time to review all the implications of developing a scheme that sits in between standard CPF savings accumulation and an already established, if often overcomplicated, CPFIS. But technological developments and emergence of digital investment platforms – often called “robo-advisers” – that can offer lower fee structures as well as enable personalised portfolio management at scale now, meant that such a proposition may now be commercially and operationally viable.
With its long investment runways and de-risking glidepaths, the incoming scheme lends itself to aviation metaphors. We look forward to this new retirement savings option taking flight by 2028.
Christopher Gee is deputy director (research) and senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, National University of Singapore.
More On This Topic
How CPF changes from 2026 can give you more to spend in retirement
Are you set to retire comfortably in Singapore?
Sunday, February 15, 2026
春节来袭｜大陆某些游客】：新加坡人会多语言，所以杂而不精？｜为何我说：只会中文，你只懂世界的1%｜多语言VS一个人的武德｜如何读书不读成个傻子｜全球化视角
春节来袭｜大陆某些游客】：新加坡人会多语言，所以杂而不精？｜为何我说：只会中文，你只懂世界的1%｜多语言VS一个人的武德｜如何读书不读成个傻子｜全球化视角
Saturday, February 14, 2026
My foldable bed when I was young. Today is 2026-02-14
This photo is from Facebook by screenshot just now.
I also slept on this type of foldable bed in my father's tailor shop when I was young for many years.
Ride-hailing: 5 users test ride-hailing apps in Singapore. Here’s what they found 2026-02-14
5 users test ride-hailing apps in Singapore. Here’s what they found
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/ride-hailing-apps-in-singapore-5-users-share-their-reviews
2026-02-14
SINGAPORE – A team of Straits Times reporters booked trips on five ride-hailing apps – Grab, Gojek, Ryde, Tada and Zig – over three days in January, on Jan 19, 23 and 28.
They made three trips per app each day, on a Monday, Wednesday and Friday, comparing fares and wait times across a total of 45 journeys.
Leaving from Toa Payoh, the team headed to various locations in the city: One Raffles Place at 9am, Ion Orchard mall at noon, and Plaza Singapura at 6pm.
These are their findings:
1. Aqil’s experience with Grab
I have been a Grab user since 2017, and while prices can be relatively cheaper compared with other apps during off-peak hours, the same does not always hold true during peak periods when surge pricing applies.
During those periods, Grab’s prices would at times surpass those charged by its competitors.
For instance, on a Wednesday during our comparison across platforms, I had to pay $24.50 for a trip from Toa Payoh to Ion Orchard, while my colleagues all got rides priced around $15.
That said, I usually did not have to worry about Grab drivers cancelling on me, although the waiting time for a ride varied significantly across the three days of our experiment.
One day, it took barely a minute from booking my ride between Toa Payoh and Plaza Singapura for my driver to show up. On another occasion, I waited 12 minutes for the driver to arrive, even though my booking from Toa Payoh to Ion Orchard was accepted in just 11 seconds.
2. Isabelle’s experience with Gojek
Gojek can be a mixed bag. Before this experiment, I would often face the “no driver available” alert and switch to another ride-hailing app, especially during peak periods.
While the weekly promo codes – ranging from a $1 to $2 discount – could keep rides fairly affordable, they were not enough of an incentive to stick to the app when surge pricing made fares significantly higher.
However, during the experiment period, Gojek was reliable, though I encountered a longer wait of 14 minutes for a driver to arrive.
In that case, the driver had accepted the booking almost immediately, and the app said he would arrive in nine minutes.
During the experiment, Gojek was mid-range in pricing among the five platforms tested.
3. Olivia’s experience with Ryde
Before this experiment, I had never used Ryde, so it was a new experience for me.
As a new user, I was surprised by how long the waits often were. Of the five reporters involved in the test, I was typically the last to get a driver. Notably, at noon on Jan 28, I waited for 15 minutes and was unable to get a driver at all. At its longest, the wait took a little over 21 minutes from the point of booking for a driver to arrive.
Additionally, Ryde’s charges were not significantly lower than those of the other apps; in fact, I found it to be even pricier on some occasions. On the evening of Jan 23, for example, it cost me $31.30 to get from Toa Payoh to Plaza Singapura. Everyone else paid lower amounts.
4. Megan’s experience with Tada
As I had never used Tada before this experiment, I was fairly excited to see how it would compare against other ride-hailing apps such as Grab or Gojek.
To my pleasant surprise, it did not disappoint.
I expected my rides to take significantly longer to arrive, so I was surprised at having to wait only an average of four minutes for each of the rides I took.
The prices were also reasonable – coming in at an average of $18 for each ride I took on Jan 23, for example – and the drivers I encountered understood clearly where to pick me up and drop me off.
5. Letitia’s experience with Zig
While my parents are Zig users, this was my first time using the app.
I was able to get a driver quite quickly most of the time, with the shortest wait for a car to arrive being just over two minutes. Still, I had my moment of despair on Jan 23 at 6pm when my booking from Toa Payoh to Plaza Singapura was cancelled thrice. I succeeded on the fourth try.
As I had difficulty setting my preferred location as the pickup point, I occasionally had to chase the taxi down as the driver drove to the other side of the block. The comments I had left earlier were not enough as a guide.
Overall, I found the app to be fairly reliable, with the rides slightly cheaper compared with some of the other apps. For instance, for my ride on Jan 19 from Toa Payoh to Ion Orchard, I paid $11.20, compared with the fares of between $12 and $14 that the rest paid.
Ride-hailing: With platform fees up - which ride-hailing app in Singapore offers the best value? 2026-02-14
With platform fees up, which ride-hailing app in Singapore offers the best value?
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/with-platform-fees-up-which-ride-hailing-app-offers-the-best-value
2026-02-14
====
Additional reporting by Olivia Poh Yijian, Isabelle Liew, Letitia Chen, Megan Wee, Anjali Raguraman, Daniel Lai, Esther Loi, Ng Wei Kai, Vanessa Paige Chelvan and Wong Man Shun.
By---
Aqil Hamzah is a transport journalist at The Straits Times. He is also interested in issues related to crime and technology.
=====
SINGAPORE - If you are rushing to work during the morning peak hour, your best bet might be Zig by ComfortDelGro – both in terms of wait time and price.
Grab was, on average, the costliest option for morning and lunchtime rides. Yet it was not the fastest from booking to a driver’s arrival, with Tada and Zig cars arriving ahead of Grab’s at times, while costing less as well.
However, in the evenings, Grab was the quickest option and the third-cheapest among five platforms, with fares nearly on a par with Gojek’s.
Ryde was the most expensive platform in the evenings, on average.
Tada generally recorded shorter wait times across the mornings, afternoons and evenings. It was the second-costliest option in the morning, but the cheapest platform at noon and in the evening.
These were the key findings by a team of Straits Times reporters who booked rides on five ride-hailing apps – Grab, Gojek, Ryde, Tada and Zig – over three days in January, on Jan 19, 23 and 28. They made three trips per app each day, on a Monday, Wednesday and Friday, comparing fares and wait times across a total of 45 journeys.
This came on the back of some operators raising platform fees from Jan 1, saying platform worker protections necessitated the move.
Shortly after ST’s experiment, Gojek raised its platform fee by 20 cents from February. It previously ranged from 90 cents to $1.50, but now costs passengers between $1.10 and $1.70.
A spokeswoman for the ride-hailing operator said the fee supports its efforts to strengthen its service offering here.
The rides started from Toa Payoh to various locations in the city – One Raffles Place at 9am to mirror the commute of an office worker, Ion Orchard mall at noon for lunch, and Plaza Singapura shopping centre at 6pm, when some might eat out after work.
While the three days are a brief window for comparison, they offer an indication of how Grab, Gojek, Ryde, Tada and Zig stacked up on indicators such as pricing and wait times during the period.
The comparison also sought to shed light on the extent to which the recent fee adjustments are shaping what users pay.
Grab and ComfortDelGro increased their platform fees from Jan 1, citing the need to contribute more to the Central Provident Fund (CPF) accounts of drivers under the Platform Workers Act.
Under the Act, which came into effect in January 2025, platform workers born on or after Jan 1, 1995, must contribute more to their CPF accounts. The contribution rates for these workers will increase by up to 2.5 percentage points a year till 2029.
Platform companies are also required to contribute their share, and their rates will increase by up to 3.5 percentage points a year until 2029.
Grab passengers now pay $1.20 in platform fees, up from 90 cents before. ComfortDelGro passengers using its app-based platforms such as Zig pay between $1 and $1.30, compared with $1 to $1.20 before.
From Jan 1, Gojek’s trip start fare and minimum fare also rose by 50 cents each. The revisions were to improve drivers’ earnings.
Ryde said it will increase its platform fees by 11 cents a ride from Feb 17.
The current fee of $1.14 that is charged to fares costing $18 and below will be increased to $1.25. Fares above $18, which now draw a platform fee of $1.36, will see that amount increased to $1.47.
Tada said it has no immediate plans to raise fees.
ST’s comparison found that Tada had the cheapest fare on the Friday morning, at $18.24, which was the lowest recorded fare at 9am across the 45 trips.
Grab was the second-cheapest option that morning, at $19. Yet it also logged the most expensive fare for the whole exercise, at $38.50 on the Monday morning.
Zig had the cheapest rides at noon on Monday and Wednesday, recording the lowest fare of $11.20 across the three days at midday on Monday.
While Ryde was the fastest on the Monday morning, it had the longest waits on Wednesday and Friday at 9am, exceeding 16 minutes on both occasions.
At noon, it again had the longest wait times, with a 21-minute and seven-second wait for a Ryde car on Friday being the longest throughout the three days of the comparison.
The next-longest wait time was with Zig on Wednesday at noon, at 17 minutes.
Tada had the shortest wait in the morning, at two minutes and 10 seconds on Friday.
Grab beat that on Friday evening with a wait time of one minute and eight seconds, the shortest recorded during the experiment.
Keeping rides affordable, while sustaining drivers’ earnings
The operators told ST that they use some form of dynamic pricing, with fares adjusted based on factors such as supply and demand.
A Grab spokeswoman said that in doing so, passengers get a ride when they need one, while ensuring its “driver-partners are compensated fairly for their time and effort”.
Fares will surge when there are more people in a particular area booking a ride than there are drivers, she said. This is to encourage drivers to head there.
The spokeswoman added that since fares reflect real-time market conditions, there may be slight variations in pricing even if bookings are made from the same location only seconds apart.
However, it is unclear how such prices are determined in the first place, as the algorithms used are not publicly disclosed.
Tada founder Kay Woo said that while the platform adjusts prices based on supply and demand, it is against “predatory” surge pricing. He said his platform can offer users lower fares because it does not take a commission from drivers.
Ryde is the only other platform with a zero-commission model.
Drivers for Zig pay a commission of between 70 cents and $1 for each app-based booking that costs more than $10, while Grab drivers pay a variable rate.
While Grab declined to provide a range for its existing commissions, a report in 2023 said the service fee charged to drivers could go as high as 25 per cent and as low as negative 10 per cent.
The amount drivers end up earning is calculated based on several factors, such as pickup distance and the time taken to reach a passenger’s pickup point, said Grab’s spokeswoman.
Gojek said trip start and minimum fares are underlying parts of fares that are reviewed periodically as part of fare adjustments. “Customers always see the full trip fare upfront before confirming a booking,” its spokeswoman said.
Such reviews aim to balance affordability while providing sustainable earnings for drivers, and are a reflection of broader operating conditions and long-term platform sustainability, the spokeswoman added.
After the announcement that its platform fee would rise from Feb 17, a Ryde spokesman said the platform reviews this fee periodically.
As it does not take commissions from drivers, the fee helps support operations and regulatory obligations, such as paying drivers’ CPF contributions.
Asked about the longer waits on average for a Ryde car, due to drivers being farther away even after rides are matched, Ryde said it is typically because nearby drivers are constrained at that point.
It continues to refine its system, which considers factors such as proximity and the likelihood of fulfilment, so that riders get quicker pickups more consistently, its spokesman added.
Fleet sizes may also play a part, as platforms with a larger pool of drivers would be able to better meet demand for rides and, in theory, drive prices down.
While platforms have traditionally been circumspect about disclosing the size of their driver pools or fleets, Grab is widely seen as the dominant player.
A ComfortDelGro spokesperson said its Zig platform has more than 20,000 drivers in Singapore.
Meanwhile, Mr Woo from Tada said the platform currently has about 30,000 drivers here, or almost half the total number of drivers licensed to offer ride-hailing services, which totalled 61,001 at the end of 2025.
The other three platforms did not disclose the number of drivers on their platforms.
Drivers’ perspectives
While the changes are framed as supporting platform worker protections, a key question is whether higher fees and fares are resulting in better earnings for drivers.
Drivers ST spoke to said they did not notice tangible differences, regardless of the platforms they use.
Mr Ong Boon Tiong, 56, drives for Ryde and Tada, and previously used Grab and Uber.
His observation over the years is that he takes home more money from these platforms than with Grab, which often takes a larger cut from drivers.
“That is without taking into account labour costs, petrol costs and car rental costs,” he said. Labour costs refers to the work that drivers put in to ferry passengers.
Mr Ong is of the view that the platform fee increases are a way for operators to charge riders more, while helping to offset drivers’ CPF contributions, without eating too much into the operators’ profits.
Grab driver Uonos Mohamed, who is 74 and close to retirement, said he barely noticed increases to the amount he earns each day.
“I can’t see the amount that passengers are charged; all I can see is how much I’ll earn from the trip,” said the former Traffic Police officer.
“Every day, I just drive until I earn about $120 a day, after accounting for petrol and rent. This job keeps me busy.
Users’ choice
Ultimately, cost and wait time are the two crucial factors that influence a user’s decision on which platform to go for, said Associate Professor Amy Wong, vice-dean for the School of Business at the Singapore University of Social Sciences.
If passengers are in a rush, they would prioritise the option that gets them to their destination fastest, although other factors such as income levels would also play a part in their ride-hailing decisions.
Instead of comparing across every single app, people would likely already have a set of platforms that they default to when making a booking, she said.
“These days, customers are no longer loyal to one platform,” said Prof Wong. She added that users would opt for what they deem acceptable, whether in terms of wait time or price, rather than comparing across platforms for the best deal.
For Madam Susan Siew, 61, the apps she defaults to are Grab and Tada.
The personal assistant uses the apps about three or four times weekly, mostly to travel between her home in Bedok and workplace in Changi.
She said: “Grab’s response is faster than Tada’s, even though it is more expensive at times. I am willing to pay more, especially when I am in a rush.”
For flight steward Nelson Ferdinand, cost is key. Living in Woodlands, he travels to Changi Airport at odd hours to catch flights.
“Personally, I gravitate towards using Tada because it is generally cheaper.”
While he does occasionally compare fares between ride-hailing platforms, he said it is unlikely that he will use an alternative, unless it costs less.
“All I need in a ride-hailing app is a short waiting time and for my fare to be affordable.
“But if prices increase, it is not like I have much of a choice but to take them anyway.”
- Additional reporting by Olivia Poh Yijian, Isabelle Liew, Letitia Chen, Megan Wee, Anjali Raguraman, Daniel Lai, Esther Loi, Ng Wei Kai, Vanessa Paige Chelvan and Wong Man Shun.
- Aqil Hamzah is a transport journalist at The Straits Times. He is also interested in issues related to crime and technology.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
