Blog

Costs of the Altersvorsorgedepot: how much in fees is too much?

September 30, 2026 Comments Off on Costs of the Altersvorsorgedepot: how much in fees is too much?
Mann mittleren Alters, Altersvorsorge und langfristige Kapitalanlagen

The Altersvorsorgedepot (Germany’s state-subsidized retirement investment account) has barely been passed into law and the first big argument is already raging. It is about money, more precisely about costs. On LinkedIn and in the trade press, providers, consumer advocates and advisors are wrestling over how expensive subsidized retirement provision may be. Some are celebrating the zero-euro securities account, others warn of a race to the bottom on price. Time for a sober assessment.

The key points at a glance

  • With an own contribution of €300 a month over 44 years, an Altersvorsorgedepot can grow to more than €1 million at a net return of 6.5 percent.

  • The largest component of the final balance is not your own contributions, nor is it the subsidy, but the return itself: in this example it accounts for more than 80 percent of the total capital.

  • The government subsidy helps to push the balance past the million mark. The decisive lever, however, remains starting as early as possible.

  • In this model the securities account needs around 33 years for the first €500,000. The second half million then takes only about 11 more years.

  • The example shows a gross figure before tax and without adjustment for inflation. It is a model calculation, not a forecast and not a guarantee.

A worked example for the Altersvorsorgedepot shows how monthly own contributions, government subsidy and returns add up to a total over the decades. In the model used here, an own contribution of €300 a month over 44 years at a net return of 6.5 percent leads to capital of around €1,036,763 before tax.

join the waiting list

What the argument is about

At its core it is about a single number. The Bundestag has capped the costs of the default standard product at a maximum of 1 percent per year; the draft originally provided for 1.5 percent. Many considered that too high. Consumer advocates called for 0.5 percent, and a petition to that effect gathered more than 100,000 signatures in just two days. On the other side, the banking industry would have preferred to scrap the cap altogether, on the grounds that competition would push prices down anyway.

One point often gets lost here. The cap applies only to the default standard product. Alongside it, providers may continue to offer more expensive, advice-intensive or guaranteed tariffs that are not bound by this limit.

Why costs make such a difference

The reason for the fuss is simple. Over decades, every tenth of a percentage point in fees eats up a surprising share of the return. A self-built ETF account often costs only 0.2 to 0.4 percent a year, a broad global ETF even less. Actively managed funds, by contrast, quickly reach 1.5 percent. Sounds like very little. Over twenty or thirty years, however, the difference adds up to five- and six-figure sums, because costs are subject to the same compound interest as returns, only working against you.

That is exactly what providers are emphasizing these days too. On LinkedIn, Vanguard and Franklin Templeton point to the cost lever, arguing that every cent in fees can be missing in retirement, and the asset manager etops sums it up: private provision does not fail because of the subsidy but because of excessive costs.

Try it out

What securities account costs really cost you

Figures feel abstract until you see them for yourself. Set your monthly contribution and the term, and the securities account cost calculator shows how much different fees cost over the years. Seemingly small percentage points quickly turn into large sums. Give it a try.

What the calculator shows in euros decides, in real life, which provider you choose. Small differences in cost, large effect. That is exactly what we look at in the provider monitor, which compares the securities accounts by their total costs.

Monatliche Sparrate iIhr eigener Beitrag pro Monat. 200 €
25 €1.000 €
Laufzeit iÜber wie viele Jahre Sie sparen. Üblich: Zeit bis Renteneintritt. 30 Jahre
10 Jahre40 Jahre
Depotgebühr p. a. iJährliche Kosten Ihres Depots. ETF-Broker: ~0,3 %. Bank: ~1 %. Aktiver Fonds: ~1,5 % und mehr. 1,0 %
0 %2 %
Depot-Wert nach 30 Jahren
–
bei 1,0 % Kosten p. a.
Nur an Kosten verloren
–
Über die gesamte Laufzeit

Annahme: 6,0 % Bruttorendite p. a.

Erweiterte Berechnung Mit Einkommen, Rendite, Kosten, Inflation, Riester-Übertrag, ETF-Vergleich

Unverbindliche Modellrechnung, keine Anlageberatung, keine Garantie künftiger Wertentwicklung. Vergangene Wertentwicklungen sind kein verlässlicher Indikator für künftige Wertentwicklungen.

The other side

As clear as the cost lever is, there is a serious counter-position. Occupational pension expert Cordula Vis-Paulus warns on LinkedIn against a pure race to the bottom on price: a zero-euro securities account is not automatically the best one, and good advice has its value. She opposes the widespread view that retirement provision should cost next to nothing. A cheap securities account is of little use if the wrong contributions are paid into it or if it is sold in a panic in the first crisis. Behind this lies an old conflict between low-cost direct sales and the more expensive but supported distribution through advisors.

What our expert says

For Rolf Henning Hackel, both sides are right, each in their own way. Costs, he says, are the strongest lever savers themselves have in their hands, and over thirty or forty years the difference between 0.3 and 1 percent makes an enormous amount of difference. The debate is therefore justified, and the capped price of the default standard product a real step forward compared with the old Riester world.

And yet. Staring only at the last decimal place falls short, Hackel says, because the cheapest provider is not automatically the best. In the end, the ETF selection and flexibility count too, but above all that you start at all and stick with it. For anyone who needs support in doing so, advice can be worth its money, as long as it is transparent and fairly remunerated.

“Costs are decisive, but they are not the whole story,” says Hackel. “A cheap securities account that nobody pays into achieves less than a slightly more expensive one that is used consistently.”

What this means for you as a saver

For your decision this means one thing above all. Look at the total costs first, but do not stop there. The default standard product is a good, capped starting point. Anyone who is confident of handling everything themselves will do even more cheaply with a low-cost ETF account. And anyone who wants support should look closely at what the advice costs and whether it is independent. You do not have to work this out yourself. As soon as the first providers launch, our provider monitor will compare all securities accounts by the same standards, giving the greatest weight to total costs. That way you can see at a glance who is really cheap and who only sounds cheap.

Conclusion

The cost debate is justified and does the market good, because competition pushes prices down. It only becomes a trap if, in the end, price is all that counts. For savers the message remains simple. Watch out for low, transparent costs, check the overall package, and above all get started. Missing out on that is more expensive in the end than any fee. And when the time comes, our provider monitor will help you find the cheapest and best securities account.

Sources

  • German Bundestag, “Bundestag approves the Altersvorsorgedepot”
  • net, “Altersvorsorgedepot cost cap: well intentioned and badly done again?”
  • de, “Altersvorsorgedepot: Scalable makes the first move on price”
  • Discussion on LinkedIn (posts by providers, advisors and consumer advocates, August 2026)

This article is for information purposes and does not constitute investment advice.

join the waiting list
Frequently asked questions

FAQ on costs of the Altersvorsorgedepot

How high are the costs of the default standard product?

The reduction in yield (RIY) is capped at a maximum of 1 percent per year. Individual providers are already announcing significantly cheaper terms.

Is a self-built ETF account cheaper?

As a rule, yes. A broadly diversified ETF account often costs only 0.2 to 0.4 percent a year, but it comes without support and without the government subsidy of the Altersvorsorgedepot.

Is advice worth it despite the costs?

That depends on you. For anyone who needs security and support, advice can be worth its money, as long as it is transparent and fairly remunerated.

Über den Autor

Rolf Henning Hackel

Jurist & Finanzmarktexperte · AVD Anbieter Vergleich

Rolf Henning Hackel ist Diplom-Jurist und seit über 22 Jahren als Vorstand und Geschäftsführer für unterschiedliche Softwaredienstleister der Finanzbranche sowie als Unternehmensgründer tätig. Als absoluter Marktexperte kennt er nicht nur die verschiedenen Anbieter, sondern auch die Produkte der Finanzindustrie mit ihren Stärken und Schwächen sowie deren regulatorischen Rahmen. Beim AVD Anbieter Vergleich schreibt er über das neue Altersvorsorgedepot und erklärt Förderung, Anbieter und Renditechancen in verständlichen Worten – unabhängig und werbefrei.

Linkedin User List
Rolf Henning Hackel, Finanzexperte und Gründer von AVD Vergleich