Trust bank fee structure comparison

ConfidenceLikelyUpdated2026-07-29Review by2026-10-27Sources16Machine-translatedOriginal (JA)

On this page

Wiki route

This entry sits under banking index and complements the operating-model deep dives — read it alongside Master Trust Bank operating model, Custody Bank operating model, Japan master trust and custody bank landscape, the cross-camp matrix Japan trust bank vs global custodian comparison matrix, and the operating comparison trust-bank custody operating comparison. Pair it with the entity pages MTBJ, CBJ, MUFG Trust, SMTB, Mizuho Trust, SMBC Trust, BNY Mellon Japan, State Street Japan, and JP Morgan Japan. For settlement-rail context see JASDEC settlement operations. For institutional context see Japan listed financial groups investable universe.

TL;DR

Public disclosures support a comparison of business scope and disclosure availability, but not a reliable entity-by-entity fee or “pricing power” ranking. Mandate-level custody and pension terms are generally contractual; investment-trust remuneration is observable fund by fund in prospectuses and trust deeds; listed parents report broader segments. This public page therefore records only observable disclosure boundaries. Analytical estimates remain outside the public corpus.

1. 機関位置

Entity Category Public AUC anchor Listing Granular fee disclosure
MTBJ JP custody-only specialist ~¥770tn (2025-03末, MTBJ disclosure) Non-listed None at line-item; aggregated in MUFG / 4-shareholder consolidated
CBJ JP custody-only specialist ~¥696tn (2025-03末, CBJ disclosure) Non-listed None at line-item; aggregated in SMTB / Mizuho-side consolidated
MUFG Trust JP full-service trust bank Trust assets in 100s of trillions; AUC + real-estate + pension Subsidiary of MUFG (listed) Aggregated segment disclosure
SMTB JP full-service trust bank Trust assets in 100s of trillions Subsidiary of SMT Holdings (listed) Aggregated segment disclosure
Mizuho Trust JP full-service trust bank Trust assets in 10s-100s of trillions Subsidiary of Mizuho FG (listed) Aggregated segment disclosure
SMBC Trust JP retail-PB-oriented trust bank <¥10tn (PB / 富裕層 focus) Subsidiary of SMBC Group (listed) Aggregated under retail / PB segment
BNY Mellon Japan Global custodian — Japan unit JP-specific AUC non-disclosed; parent ~$50tn AuC/A Subsidiary of BNY Mellon (NYSE) Parent-level aggregate only
State Street Japan Global custodian — Japan unit JP-specific AUC non-disclosed; parent ~$46.6tn AuC/A (2024-12) Subsidiary of State Street (NYSE) Parent-level aggregate only
JP Morgan Japan Global custodian — Japan unit JP-specific AUC non-disclosed; parent ~$35tn+ AuC (end-2024) Subsidiary of JPMorgan Chase (NYSE) Parent-level aggregate only
Citi Japan Global custodian — Japan unit JP-specific AUC non-disclosed; parent ~$26.3tn AuC/A (2024-09) Subsidiary of Citigroup (NYSE) Parent-level aggregate only

Sources: ^[MTBJ FY2024 results, https://www.mastertrust.co.jp/assets/pdf/financial/zm20250521.pdf; CBJ 2025 disclosure, https://www.custody.jp/data/disclosure/pdf/disclosure202507.pdf; State Street FY2024 results, https://investors.statestreet.com/investor-news-events/press-releases/news-details/2025/State-Street-Corporation-NYSE-STT-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2024-Financial-Results/default.aspx; Citigroup Q3 2024 results, https://www.citigroup.com/rcs/citigpa/storage/public/Earnings/Q32024/2024pr-qtr3rslt.pdf.]

Custody fee mechanics

Fee component Pricing logic Typical magnitude (industry inference, not entity-specific)

Pension trust admin fees

Component Pricing logic Magnitude inference

Securities investment trust admin fees

Component Pricing logic Source for public observation
Fund accounting / NAV calc Bundled into 受託会社報酬 Stated only as bundled rate
Distribution processing Bundled Not separately disclosed

Across the 投信 industry the 受託会社報酬 is typically a small fraction of total fund expense ratio — the bulk of the expense ratio sits at the asset manager (運用会社報酬) and the distributor (販売会社報酬) rather than the trust bank.

Real-estate trust fees (full-service trust banks only)

Component Pricing logic Magnitude

This line is absent at MTBJ and CBJ — the custody-only specialists do not run real-estate trust.

Cross-entity public comparison boundary

Comparison field Domestic custody-only specialists Full-service Japanese trust banks Global custodians’ Japan operations
Legal entity and business scope Official company profile and FSA list Official company profile and FSA list FSA list and local official profile
Assets under custody / administration Entity disclosure where published Trust-account or segment disclosure; definitions vary Usually parent-level; Japan-only amount often absent
Mandate fee Generally not published as an entity tariff Generally not published as an entity tariff Generally not published for the Japan unit
Investment-trust remuneration Observable in each fund’s statutory documents Observable in each fund’s statutory documents Depends on the named trustee and fund
Segment revenue Private-company disclosure may be limited Listed-parent segment disclosure, not a custody-only fee line Parent securities-services reporting, not Japan-only
Valid conclusion Scope and disclosure availability Scope and disclosure availability Scope and disclosure availability

Sources: ^[Trust Companies Association of Japan, https://www.shintaku-kyokai.or.jp/trust/trustbanks/; MTBJ and CBJ official disclosures; MUFG, SMT Holdings, Mizuho FG, BNY, State Street, JPMorgan, and Citigroup investor-relations pages listed in the frontmatter.]

Observation to monitor Required public evidence
Assets under custody / administration Consistently defined entity or parent disclosure over comparable periods
Investment-trust trustee remuneration Fund prospectus / trust deed for each sampled fund
Securities-services revenue Listed-parent segment result and stated perimeter
Pension or real-estate trust activity Trust-bank or parent disclosure identifying the business line
Infrastructure cost Current JASDEC / JSCC / BoJ tariff or participation document

Sources:

Why granular per-bank fee tables are impossible to publish externally

Reason Impact
Custody fees are mandate-specific contracts No single tariff per bank
Group-consolidated disclosure aggregates many fee lines Cannot isolate custody from other trust-bank fees
投信 受託会社報酬 disclosed only per fund in each 信託約款 Manual aggregation needed across all funds
Pension trust admin fees are individually negotiated Including GPIF
Global-custodian Japan units do not disclose JP-specific lines Only parent-level aggregates
Real-estate trust fees vary by deal Cannot benchmark to a per-bp standard

Sources: ^[Trust Companies Association of Japan, https://www.shintaku-kyokai.or.jp/; official entity and parent disclosures listed in the frontmatter.]

Public observable per-fund 投信 受託会社報酬

For a structured public-data study, the 投信 受託会社報酬 across major fund families is the most observable line:

Asset manager family 受託会社 (most common) Typical 受託会社報酬 (annualized)

A precise study would scrape 信託約款 of leading funds for the documented per-fund 受託会社報酬 — the data is public per fund but laborious to aggregate.

Regulatory fee constraints

Layer Constraint
信託業法 fiduciary-duty rules Fees must be fair and disclosed; conflict-of-interest controls
金商法 投信運用報告書 disclosure Fund-level fees including 受託会社報酬 must be disclosed
Pension fund 受託者責任 Fees subject to pension trustee fiduciary review
Stewardship Code Voluntary; encourages transparent fee disclosure where possible
FSA supervisory guidance General reasonableness review; no rate-cap regime

Sources: ^[FSA trust-business financial-institution list, https://www.fsa.go.jp/menkyo/menkyoj/kenei.pdf; Trust Companies Association of Japan, https://www.shintaku-kyokai.or.jp/.]

Accounting view

Item Entity that recognizes
Custody / admin fees as revenue Trust bank P&L
Custody / admin fees as expense Asset owner / 投信ファンド
Off-balance-sheet trust AUC Not on trust bank’s balance sheet
On-balance settlement-account residuals Trust bank’s balance sheet (small)
Lending revenue share Trust bank revenue + beneficial-owner revenue (split per contract)

Sources:

Comparability problems

Problem Effect
AUC vs AuA definition variation “Assets under custody” vs “assets under administration” measured differently across entities; cross-entity AUC numbers are not strictly comparable
Mix-effect across asset classes One entity’s mix-weight (domestic equity / JGB / foreign / 投信) differs sharply from another’s
Domestic-only vs global aggregation Global custodians report parent-level numbers; JP-specific lines opaque
投信 受託会社 fees per fund vs per-bank aggregate Per-fund disclosure can be aggregated manually but is not officially aggregated
Real-estate fees revenue lumpy Full-service trust banks have lumpy deal-driven real-estate fees

Sources:

Fee cost-side from infrastructure participation

Infrastructure Fee paid by trust bank (input cost)
JASDEC participation + per-transaction Fixed annual + per-ticket fee; published in JASDEC tariff
JSCC clearing Clearing-membership cost + per-trade clearing fee
BoJ JGB book-entry BoJ system participation cost
BoJ-net cash settlement Per-transaction cost
全銀ネット Per-transaction cost
ICSD (via global custodians) Pass-through global-custody fee
Voting platform (ICJ etc.) Platform fee

Sources

#banking#trust-bank#custody#asset-administration#pension#fees

Discovery

Keep reading

Related

Read next

Links here