Subscale funds negatively affect 1.7m members

7 September 2017
| By Jassmyn |
image
image
expand image

A member of a subscale superannuation fund could be potentially $170,000 worse off than a member of a best performing fund because of the current industrial system, according to the Financial Services Council (FSC).

Using Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and modern awards data, an analysis by the FSC found subscale funds managed $94 billion and left up to 1.7 million members potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars worse off in retirement.

 The FSC said subscale funds made up 153 (30.2 per cent) of modern award superannuation listings and 33 funds managed less than $10 billion in funds. The average performance of the 33 funds over 10 years was 4.5 per cent.

The FSC said this was 0.8 per cent lower than the average 5.3 per cent performance of all ‘growth’ options in the market for both industry and retail funds, and 1.4 per cent lower than the performance of the best performing MySuper products.

The weakest performing fund returned 2.7 per cent over 10 years, managed less than $1 billion, and was listed in two modern awards.

FSC chief executive, Sally Loane, said: “If this many Australian workers were enabled by law to languish in poorly paying jobs with working conditions way below their peers, for as long as 40 years, there’d be outrage across the entire community”.

“So, we shouldn’t tolerate a system which leaves people in superannuation funds delivering significantly poor returns, for years and years,” she said.

“Many can’t change funds because of the current industrial laws governing default super, and many are chronically disengaged and disinterested. Either way, the system needs to change if the policy is going to work for all Australians.”

Loane said the prevalence of subscale funds in the default system was a major public policy issue that need to be addressed given the negative impact on consumers’ financial outcomes.

The FSC’s submission to the Productivity Commission on the competitiveness and efficiency of the super system recommended a model that allowed consumers to exit underperforming, subscale funds and switch to a fund regardless of whether it was a retail or an industry fund, which would deliver stronger returns and a more comfortable retirement.

 

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Recommended for you

sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

3 months 3 weeks ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

4 months ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

4 months ago

Michael Lovett, who left the investment firm just three months after launching its Vanguard Super offering, has taken up a chief executive role at an Australian asset man...

6 hours 10 minutes ago

As Australia gears up for the May budget, Treasurer Jim Chalmers has shed light on the significant global economic challenges that are shaping the nation’s fiscal decisio...

6 hours 39 minutes ago

A fintech leader has said that AI technologies will have profound implications for the superannuation sector....

6 hours 39 minutes ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND