I'd value a peer review of this from the SMSF Association, or someone nominated by them. We all saw the issues with the definition of return differing between SMSFs and larger funds, and the resultant fake news. SMSFs have an older demographic which may skew investments into more conservative shares than the overall market, and different cash flow s with contributions and pensions occurring heavily in June could also skew results. The research may be correct, but having it reviewed would be valuable. People could make investment decisions based on reading articles like this.