Formula Overview
Score = [(40% × Funding Score × Risk Transfer Multiplier) + (40% × ER Intelligence Score) + (20% × Incumbent/Trustee Score)] × Valuation Timing Modifier
+ (40% × ER Intelligence Score)
+ (20% × Incumbent Score × Trustee Modifier)
Score is the raw weighted sum (0–100) — no normalisation applied. Scores are absolute and stable: a scheme's score only changes when its own data changes (e.g. a new ER report is generated).
A-List = score ≥ 50 |
B-List = score < 50 |
LGPS schemes = excluded entirely
Factor 1: Funding Level
40% weight
Applied with the Risk Transfer Multiplier. Fully bought-out schemes are excluded from the propensity universe.
| Funding Level (Technical Provisions) |
Base Score |
Rationale |
| < 60% |
100 |
PPF panel — high insolvency risk, specialist advisory opportunity |
| 60% – 80% |
50 |
Underfunded but viable, 10+ years from buyout |
| 80% – 100% |
75 |
Sweet spot — ~5–10 years from buyout, ideal Enplan candidate |
| 100% – 120% |
100 |
Approaching buyout funding, accelerating endgame work |
| > 120% |
100 |
Near/above buyout, high-value short-term projects |
| Unknown |
60 |
Neutral default |
Risk Transfer Multiplier
Applied to the Funding Base Score. Schemes with significant buy-ins are partially or fully de-risked and represent reduced advisory opportunity.
| Buy-in / Buyout Status |
Multiplier |
Rationale |
| No buy-in / clear buyout trajectory / mature no buyout |
1.0 |
Full advisory opportunity |
| Partial buy-in — < 30% of liabilities insured |
0.9 |
Mostly uninsured — strong ongoing advisory need |
| Partial buy-in — 30%–60% of liabilities insured |
0.6 |
Significant portion insured, reduced scope |
| Partial buy-in — > 60% of liabilities insured |
0.3 |
Majority insured, limited residual advisory scope |
| Buy-in status unknown |
0.95 |
Near-full score pending data |
| Fully bought out / Superfund transfer |
0.0 |
Excluded from propensity universe |
Factor 2: Expert Research Intelligence
40% weight
The most actionable factor — generating an ER document immediately improves this score and surfaces specific pain points Isio can address. v2.0 uses a continuous score (0–100) rather than discrete tiers, giving much greater differentiation between schemes.
Not Yet Rated: Schemes with no ER report are scored on Factors 1 and 3 only (50/50 weighting) and tagged "No ER yet". They are not penalised — their score reflects structural signals only and will improve once an ER is generated.
| ER Intelligence Signal |
Points |
Notes |
| No ER report produced |
N/A |
Factor 2 excluded — structural score only (F1+F3 at 50/50) |
| ER report exists (base) |
+20 |
Base score for having any ER data |
| Pain point categories identified (business issues, pension risk, cost reduction) |
+20 per category (max +60) |
3 categories × 20 points each |
| Isio USP keyword hits (Enplan, buyout, endgame, LDI, fiduciary, covenant, VFM, admin, data quality, GMP, SIP…) |
+3 per hit (max +15) |
Signals direct relevance to Isio's service lines |
| Governance keyword hits (TPR, compliance, chair statement, general code, risk management, trustee training…) |
+2 per hit (max +6) |
Governance gaps are high-value advisory triggers |
| Critical governance concerns (≥2 governance hits) |
+5 bonus |
Indicates systemic governance risk — highest advisory urgency |
Maximum ER score: 20 + 60 + 15 + 6 + 5 = 106, capped at 100.
Factor 3: Weak Incumbent Adviser
20% weight
Applied with the Trustee Modifier. The professional trustee profile either amplifies or suppresses the switching opportunity.
| Incumbent Signal |
Base Score |
| Weak or consolidating incumbent (Capita, EQ/Equiniti, small boutique) |
100 |
| Strong incumbent (LCP, WTW, Mercer, Aon) |
60 |
| Mid-tier incumbent |
20 |
| Unknown |
40 |
Trustee Modifier
Applied to the Incumbent Base Score. The professional trustee profile either amplifies or suppresses the switching opportunity.
| Professional Trustee Signal |
Modifier |
Rationale |
| No professional trustee — lay board only |
1.0 |
Maximum sponsor influence, highest receptivity |
| Corporate trustee (sponsor-run) |
1.0 |
Same as lay board |
| Non-conflicted sole trustee (BESTrustees, Capital Cranfield, LawDeb, PAN, Pi, ITS) |
1.2 (capped at 100) |
Governance already outsourced; Enplan is the natural complement |
| IGG (sole or co-trustee) |
1.1 |
Dominant in ISIO universe (1,484 schemes), no competing bundle, broadly supportive |
| Vidett (sole or co-trustee) |
1.0 |
Neutral — hybrid model, no competing bundle |
| Entrust (sole trustee — consolidator route) |
0.7 |
Operates via DB consolidator vehicle, may steer towards bundled solution |
| ZEDRA Trust Essentials (sole trustee, scheme <£20m) |
0.5 |
Actively marketed as a complete solution for small schemes — will resist external advisers |
| Dalriada.Together (sole trustee) |
0.2 |
Strongest competitive threat — integrated trusteeship + governance + administration + operations |
Scoring & Classification
- Calculate raw score for each scheme using the weighted formula above (0–100)
- Schemes with no ER report are scored on Factors 1 & 3 only (50/50 weighting) and tagged "No ER yet" — they are not penalised for missing ER data
- Score is used directly — no normalisation is applied. Scores are absolute and stable across runs. A scheme's score only changes when its own data changes.
- A-List = score ≥ 65 v2.0
- B-List = score < 65 v2.0
- LGPS schemes are excluded from propensity scoring entirely — the Enplan model applies to private-sector DB schemes only
- Schemes with a Risk Transfer Multiplier of 0.0 (fully bought out) are excluded from the universe
Key Insights
- A-List schemes (score ≥ 65) represent the highest-priority Enplan prospects — 847 schemes (48%) in the current dataset
- B-List schemes (score < 65) are monitored for trigger events but are currently lower priority — 904 schemes (52%)
- Schemes tagged "No ER yet" (463 schemes) have been scored on structural signals only — generating an Expert Research report for these schemes will immediately recalibrate their score and may move them to A-List
- LGPS schemes are excluded from propensity scoring — the Enplan model applies to private-sector DB schemes only
- Expert Research is the highest-weighted actionable factor (40%) — generating an ER document immediately improves a scheme's intelligence score and surfaces specific pain points Isio can address
- Funding sweet spot is 80%–120%+ funded on TP basis — these schemes are accelerating towards end-game and represent the most time-sensitive opportunities
- PPF panel advantage — Isio's position on the PPF panel makes very low-funded schemes (<60%) attractive prospects, unlike most competitors
- Weak incumbents (Capita, Equiniti/EQ, small boutiques) signal natural switching opportunities
- Trustee amplifiers — Non-conflicted sole trustees (BESTrustees, Capital Cranfield, LawDeb, PAN, Pi, ITS) carry a 1.2× multiplier; IGG carries 1.1×
- Trustee suppressors — Dalriada.Together (0.2×) and ZEDRA Trust Essentials (0.5×) represent the strongest competitive threats
How to Use This:
Use the Focus filter to view A-List and B-List schemes. Generate Expert Research documents to improve the intelligence score for high-priority prospects — this is the single most impactful action you can take. Filter by funding level to identify schemes in the <60% or 100%+ bands where Isio's PPF panel membership and end-game expertise create a competitive advantage. The propensity score is recalculated automatically when new Expert Research is available.
Enplan Propensity Formula v2.0 | Threshold: A-List ≥65 | 463 schemes tagged "No ER yet" | Scores recalculated after each ER batch
