The Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority is planning to rename the Capital Preservation Fund after investors complained the fund could not guarantee the return of their capital. Speaking on the Commercial Radio programme Teacup in a Storm, the authority's external affairs senior manager Hessler Lee admitted the name might have given the impression that investors' capital could be fully preserved. 'We realise the name may be a bit confusing to the public. We are evaluating it to see how we can make it more accurate in reflecting the risk and the future returns of this type of fund. We are preparing to propose an amendment,' he said. The Capital Preservation Fund invested exclusively in Hong Kong-dollar bank deposits and short-term debt securities, Mr Lee explained. As interest rates of debt securities may fluctuate affecting the value of the fund, investors may suffer losses. But Mr Lee said investors would not lose their capital in paying their investment service providers, since administrative expenses could only be deducted when the returns of the fund for the month exceeded the monthly savings rate prescribed by the authority. A caller to the programme, who identified himself as an MPF sales agent, said it often took him a long time to explain to his clients what the Capital Preservation Fund was. He worried that some employers might be misled by the fund's name if they just read the MPF guides themselves. Apart from renaming the fund, Mr Lee said the authority had asked all MPF service providers to increase transparency when reviewing investment information with clients. 'Investors need to know and to understand what they have invested in,' Mr Lee added. 'And we will also reinforce public education on MPF.'