Asian savers want independence in old age. Cash won’t get them there.

Most older savers across nine Asian markets say they would rather keep their independence than simply live longer. Yet more than half name cash as their main retirement resource, ahead of pensions or property, and only about one in three feel they have saved enough. Manulife’s latest regional survey of more than 9,000 people, published in 2025, puts the gap between what Asians want from old age and what they have set aside in plain numbers.

The shift is reshaping demand for income and health products. Whether households can act on it is a separate question.

About 62% of people surveyed across nine Asian markets now say keeping their independence matters more than adding years to their life. That is a clear statement of preference. The harder finding sits underneath it.

More than half of those same respondents name cash or bank deposits as their primary retirement resource, ahead of pensions and property. Manulife, which surveyed over 9,000 people across Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, Mainland China, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam in 2025, found that only about one in three felt confident they had saved enough.

So the aspiration is documented. The funding for it is not. Cash held over a 25- or 30-year retirement loses value to inflation and cannot meet rising healthcare costs. The question this raises is uncomfortable: people want decades of financial autonomy, and most are funding it with the one asset least suited to the job.

The aspiration is funded with the wrong asset

The numbers point in one direction. Roughly 7 in 10 respondents said financial health is essential to living longer, better lives. In Singapore, only 6% picked a longer lifespan as their top wish for old age. People are not asking for more years. They are asking for years they can pay for.

Debbie Lau, Head of Retirement Solutions for Hong Kong at Manulife, has noted that many savers there still lean heavily on cash and basic savings accounts. Those accounts may not keep pace with inflation or medical bills over a longer life. The reliance is not a small detail. It is the structural weak point in the whole picture.

Roy Gori, President and CEO of Manulife, has framed the same finding plainly: many in Asia now see financial security and health as inseparable from a longer, better life, yet a sizeable gap remains between what they want and what they have prepared. The survey’s regional findings on longevity and retirement set out that distance market by market.

For a Western professional banking in Hong Kong or Singapore, the practical effect is already visible. Banks and insurers there increasingly bundle retirement, health cover, and wealth management into one offering. These packages often demand higher minimum balances or premiums, raising ongoing costs, but they also open access to local pension schemes and income portfolios built for longer working lives. The product side is moving. Whether household behaviour moves with it is the next question.

Public pillars set the floor, not the ceiling

The mandatory systems explain part of the cash reliance. Singapore’s Central Provident Fund requires contributions of up to 37% of wages for younger workers, and its CPF Life annuity scheme pays a lifelong monthly income. Hong Kong’s Mandatory Provident Fund is thinner, capped at HKD 1,500 a month each from employer and employee.

These pillars set a floor. They were never designed to fund three decades of independent later life on their own.

That is where the OECD Pensions Unit raises a warning worth weighing. It has found that heavy reliance on informal savings and family support across parts of Asia leaves many older people exposed, and it recommends wider funded pensions and stronger financial literacy. The same caution applies to private products: sophisticated income solutions help only those who buy and understand them.

So the picture closes where it opened. People across Asia have decided what they want from old age: not more years, but years they control. The means to fund that decision — pensions, annuities, income portfolios — exist and are growing. The cash on the household balance sheet is the evidence that, for most, the decision and the funding have not yet met.

Beyond the headline

The response gap

Financial institutions are racing to package longevity-focused products, but most Asian households still default to cash and informal support networks. The mismatch between sophisticated product design and basic savings behaviour means that, without parallel gains in financial literacy and trust, the new offerings may mainly serve affluent segments, leaving the majority exposed to longer lifespans without adequate income buffers.

The money trail

Behind the rhetoric about aging well lies a revenue shift toward firms that can monetise longer client relationships. Insurers, asset managers, and private banks that anchor themselves in health, retirement, and intergenerational planning stand to capture recurring fees over decades. Institutions slow to pivot from one-off product sales to lifetime advisory models risk losing relevance in a market where longevity has become the central organising principle for personal finance.

What isn’t being said

Most discussions of financial longevity focus on middle-class consumers who already have surplus income, while largely ignoring low-wage and informal-sector workers who struggle to save at all. For them, redefining longevity in aspirational terms does little without changes in wages, social safety nets, and affordable health coverage. Those factors will decide whether longer lives mean longer security or simply extended strain.

What the cash reliance means for your own planning

With the funding gap now documented across nine markets, anyone with money or retirement plans tied to Asia faces concrete decisions over the next year.

• Expats banking in Hong Kong or Singapore

  Check official retirement-saving options in your market before committing to private products. Read Singapore’s CPF contribution and CPF Life pages or the MPF System at a Glance to see how the mandatory floor interacts with the bundled products banks now push. Expect higher minimum balances if you take an integrated plan.

• Investors holding Asia financial-sector funds

  If you own or plan to buy Asia-focused insurance or financial-sector ETFs, read the latest factsheets from your broker to check exposure to life insurers and wealth managers positioned for this trend in Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, and Malaysia. Weight toward firms running recurring advisory income, not one-off sales.

• Households defaulting to cash

  Cash held across a 25-year retirement is the asset least able to track inflation or medical costs. Before the next contribution cycle, compare your deposit holdings against income-oriented or annuity products, and treat the roughly one-in-three confidence figure as a prompt to run your own numbers.

Explainer

Financial longevity

The idea that retirement planning must fund decades of independent later life, not just a fixed post-work period. It shifts the goal from building a lump sum to generating sustainable income across a longer lifespan. In Asia it is reshaping product design toward annuities and health-linked policies rather than pure savings accumulation.

Central Provident Fund

Singapore’s mandatory savings system, funded by contributions from both employees and employers at rates up to 37% of wages for younger workers. It covers retirement, housing, and healthcare needs through linked accounts. Its CPF Life arm converts savings into lifelong monthly payouts, one of the few public schemes in Asia designed explicitly around longevity risk.

Mandatory Provident Fund

Hong Kong’s compulsory retirement scheme, requiring 5% of relevant income each from employer and employee, capped at HKD 1,500 a month per side. It forms a basic funded pillar but is widely seen as insufficient on its own. Unlike CPF Life, it does not automatically convert savings into a guaranteed lifelong income, leaving retirees to manage drawdown themselves.