Looks like our country an average student when it comes toretirement planning.

The U.S. pension system earned a “C” grade on the MelbourneMercer Global Pension Index. It joins Mexico, Brazil, FranceGermany and Poland in the “average” category. Denmark was the onlycountry on the list that received an “A” grade for having a firstclass and robust retirement income system that delivers goodbenefits, is sustainable and has a high level of integrity.

It’s hard to compare pension systems in different countriessince all are organized differently and every country has tocontend with its own economic, social, cultural, political andhistorical circumstances, but the Melbourne Mercer Global PensionIndex measures each country’s system against more than 50 questionsit believes should apply to retirement systems everywhere.

“Many of the challenges relating to aging populations aresimilar, irrespective of each country’s social, political,historical or economic influences,” the study found. “Many of thedesirable policy reforms to alleviate these challenges are alsosimilar and relate to pension ages, the level of funding forretirement, encouraging people to work longer and some benefitdesign issues that can reduce leakage of benefits beforeretirement.”

The study’s authors point out early that there’s “no perfectsystem that can be applied universally around the world. However,there are certain features and characteristics of retirement incomesystems that are likely to lead to improved benefits forindividuals and households, an increased likelihood of futuresustainability of the system, and a greater level of confidence andtrust within the community.”

The research focused on adequacy, sustainability and integrityto measure each country’s retirement income system against eachother.

Since 2009, the first year of the study, there have been severalimprovements. Some governments have increased pension ages over thelonger term and the labor force participation rate of 55- to64-year-olds in most countries has steadily increased.

Australia and Netherlands earned a “B+” while Canada, Chile,United Kingdom, Sweden, Switzerland and Singapore earned “B”grades.

None of the countries in this study earned an “E” grade, whichis the lowest possible score and reflects a poor retirement systemthat could be in the early stages of development or the countrydoesn’t have a retirement system. China, Japan, South Korea, Indiaand Indonesia all earned a “D” which meant their systems have somedesirable features but have major weaknesses or omissions that needto be addressed.

The study said each country’s system could be improved byincreasing the retirement age to reflect a longer life expectancyto reduce the costs of publicly financed pension benefits; bypromoting higher labor force participation at older ages, whichincreases available savings; by encouraging or requiring higherlevels of private saving; by increasing the coverage of employeesor self-employed in the private pension system; and by reducingleakage from the retirement savings system before retirement.