The Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST) has expressed concern that new superannuation fund reporting requirements involve the adoption of a new standard risk measure based on the frequency of negative returns over a 20-year period.
AIST chief executive Fiona Reynolds said she was concerned the risk measure represented a one-size-fits-all approach, and could send the wrong message to superannuation fund members.
Reynolds' concerns came as the superannuation industry broadly welcomed the release of an Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) discussion paper in which it not only canvassed the new risk measure but also outlined the manner in which it would deliver on the collection and publication of fund level performance data.
However, unspoken in the industry's welcome of the promised improvement in APRA data standards was the fact that it was a task set for the regulator nearly four years ago by the now retired former Minister for Financial Services and Superannuation Nick Sherry.
Indeed, APRA deputy chairman Ross Jones acknowledged that the regulator had previously consulted on the issue in 2009.
Welcoming the move by APRA, Financial Services Council (FSC) chief executive John Brogden said the new regime was long overdue and needed to be implemented as soon as possible.
"All consumers will be able to directly compare like with like on the performance of the investment options between super funds. This will replace the current collection of fund level data by APRA which the FSC describes as 'inadequate' and 'misleading'," he said.
For her part, Reynolds also noted the manner in which APRA's data had been confined to whole of fund performance and had not provided a breakdown of the performance of individual investment options.
She said she hoped the new requirements for collection of data and the reporting of returns at investment option level would put an end to the controversy that had surrounded APRA's superannuation return figures in the past.
