It has been law since the end of May 2026, and it goes live on January 1, 2027: the retirement pension depot is replacing the Riester pension. This means that millions of existing contracts will become switchable virtually overnight. And a billion-euro market will be redistributed.

A portfolio starts to move

The Retirement Pension Reform Act has passed the Bundestag and Bundesrat and came into force at the end of May. From January 1, 2027, banks, brokers, fund providers, and insurers will be allowed to offer the subsidized depot. However, there is no guarantee requirement, but instead direct access to the capital market and a mandatory, cost-capped standard version. The old Riester portfolio enjoys grandfathering protection. But those who wish to can transfer their credit to the new retirement pension depot without losing tax benefits.

And this portfolio is large. At the end of 2025, the BMAS still counted around 14.7 million Riester contracts, a downward trend for years. According to BMAS estimates, no more contributions are currently being paid for a good fifth to just under a quarter of them.

Anyone reading these figures immediately thinks of a dying legacy product. And that’s true. As a product, Riester failed due to the guarantee requirement and costs, and is accordingly unpopular in public perception. However, private pension provision itself has not disappeared; it has simply been redistributed. One part continues to flow into existing Riester contracts, which can be transferred more cheaply to the retirement pension depot starting in January. Another part has long been flowing into ETF savings plans with neobrokers—high-yield, but without a cent of state subsidies. And a third part lies in checking and instant-access savings accounts with little or no interest.

The retirement pension depot has an answer for each of these pots starting in January: transfer the expensive legacy contract to the cheaper depot, bring the unsubsidized savings plan into the subsidy scheme, and activate liquid funds for retirement for the first time.

The retirement pension depot is a real break from the old system. That is exactly what makes it attractive for millions of existing contracts and sets a portfolio in motion that was stuck for two decades. The exciting question is therefore not whether people will switch, but rather who recognizes for whom the switch is worthwhile.

Whether the switch is worthwhile is decided on a per-person basis

“Recognizing” sounds easier than it is. Because whether a switch is worthwhile is a question of the individual situation, essentially a calculation per person:

• What does the existing contract really cost over the remaining term?
• How does that compare to a retirement pension depot with capped or simply low effective costs?
• What subsidies and what tax effects are added?

No scattergun mailing can answer this calculation. It can only be made if you know the specific life situation, including a 360-degree asset overview of the specific person.

And that’s where most providers have a problem. A bank sees the checking account it manages. A broker sees the depot held with them. An insurer sees its policies. Everyone sees their own segment; no one sees the whole picture. But customers have their Riester with the insurance company, their depot with the neobroker, the ETF savings plan somewhere else, plus instant-access savings and perhaps an old building society contract. Anyone who doesn’t have a complete overview has no idea for whom the switch is worthwhile. They can only guess.

From January, there will be many providers of retirement pension depots. The product alone is therefore not a competitive advantage. That is only provided by the complete asset picture of the individual person, because it shows for whom the switch is worthwhile and when the right moment for the approach is.

Which data is decisive for a switch

Such an asset picture does not emerge on its own. The three pots from above—the old Riester contract, the ETF savings plan at the neobroker, the money in the instant-access account—must first be visible.

Identifying the legacy contract

The existing Riester contract is usually not in your own system, but its trace can be found in the account turnover: the regular direct debit to an insurer. From the transaction data, it is possible to see which pension contracts a person holds. That alone is often enough for the decisive question: Is there an expensive legacy contract here for which it is worth looking at the retirement pension depot?

Where more is needed, these contracts can be enriched beyond pure payment account data, for example with information on the provider, cost history, and type of contract. This is not yet possible for every provider.

Estimating the potential

The depot at the neobroker does not reveal what amounts could flow into a retirement pension depot, as an existing depot cannot be transferred to an AVD. But it reveals something fundamental: namely, that someone here is actively investing money to build wealth. And perhaps more importantly: on what scale they are doing so. Anyone who has long held the majority of their assets with a neobroker is highly relevant for an AVD offer, because future savings rates can be directed into a subsidized depot.

However, all of this only becomes visible when customers actively connect their external accounts and depots. In the same way, liquid funds in checking and instant-access accounts also become visible—money that could be activated for retirement.

Proving the advantage

But seeing alone is not enough. The advantage of a switch only becomes credible when it is backed by figures. And this is exactly where the challenge lies. Because “The retirement pension depot is cheaper” is not universally true: the legal cost cap of one percent per year only applies to the standard depot; individual depots can be more expensive.

Whether the switch pays off depends on the specific comparison: effective costs of the existing contract over the remaining term vs. the costs in the target product, plus tax treatment and subsidy logic. This can only be proven with data. That is, with clean, comparable cost and tax key figures per contract and per security. Those who can provide them make the advantage verifiable. Those who don’t have them are just making claims.

The model is in place, but not everyone has the data basis

One might think the hardest part is done. The product is there, the subsidies are regulated, and the steps are clear: identify the legacy contract, estimate the potential, prove the advantage, and approach at the right moment. But the same thing is missing for each of these steps: the data from all the accounts and depots that a person holds elsewhere.

This is exactly the data that wealthAPI provides. As a BaFin-licensed account information service, wealthAPI connects over 3,500 banks and brokers, standardizes their data, and refines it into usable key figures. In this way, an account transaction becomes a recognized pension contract, a depot position becomes a comparable cost figure, and a security becomes a risk classification, as required by the life-cycle logic of the standard depot.

The battle for distribution is about more than the 14.7 million Riester contracts. It is about every asset that is currently scattered, expensive, or invested without subsidies. It will not be decided by the better product display, but by the customer’s informed investment decision. Everyone will have the product starting in January. The difference will be made by those who see the person behind it.