This paper examines choice architecture and the role of pension communication to address the complexity and individualization of pension systems in Australia, Denmark, and the Netherlands, countries with top-ranked pension systems. By comparing the practices in these countries and conducting a literature review, we seek to identify best practices for pension communication. We find that (1) consumer protection and competition are especially important with more choice options available; (2) the literature on pension communication is vast with various treatments and outcome variables; (3) some behaviors seem easier to affect than others; and (4) best practice calls for pretests and investigation with larger samples to avoid unintended consequences of communication.