Today’s decision affects approximately 484 000 pension savers and close to SEK 179.5 billion in assets, resulting in eight awarded funds across seven managers, including three new entrants: Goldman Sachs Asset Management, Janus Henderson Investors and Schroders.
Of the 27 tenders submitted, five were either withdrawn or failed to meet the mandatory requirements. Notably, all three new funds awarded mandates are managed by international asset managers, broadening the category beyond the incumbent domestic-dominated structure.
| Fund manager | Awarded fund |
| Goldman Sachs Asset Management B.V. | Goldman Sachs US Technology Opportunities Equity Portfolio |
| Janus Henderson Investors Europe S.A. | Janus Henderson Horizon Global Technology Leaders Fund |
| Lannebo Kapitalförvaltning AB | Lannebo Global Growth |
| Lannebo Kapitalförvaltning AB | Lannebo Teknik |
| SEB Funds AB | SEB Teknologifond |
| Schroder Investment Management (Europe) S.A. | Schroder International Selection Fund Global Innovation |
| Skandia Fonder AB | Skandia Time Global |
| Swedbank Robur Fonder AB | Swedbank Robur Technology A |
Swedbank Robur Technology A, which previously accounted for approximately 78 per cent of category assets, emerged as a particularly strong incumbent: it received the highest quality score while also offering the lowest price among the awarded funds. This combination reinforces the conclusion that the procurement primarily improve cost efficiency and formal quality assurance, rather than forcing a reallocation of assets.
Goldman Sachs US Technology Opportunities Equity Portfolio illustrates the role of pricing in the outcome. Although its quality assessment was lower than that of a number of competing funds, its lower fee enabled it to rank within the awarded group. Liontrust GF Global Technology Fund was the closest non-awarded strategy behind Goldman Sachs, followed by DNB Teknologi.
The result underlines the importance of the Fund Selection Agency’s combined assessment of quality and price, where cost discipline can materially affect mandate outcomes even in a quality-led procurement framework.
