Underperformance not adequately punished
The Australian superannuation fund market has not sufficiently punished underperforming funds, according to new research commissioned by the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees.
The research, undertaken by the Faculty of Economics and Research at the University of Sydney, has pointed to the outperformance of industry funds compared to their retail counterparts.
It said there had been an expectation by policymakers that at some point in time competition would lead to better performing funds being rewarded, but this was not necessarily occurring.
"It would also be heroic to think that such a competitive market is a realistic prospect in the foreseeable future," the research analysis said.
It said this was because the superannuation fund market did not work to equalise returns and this meant sustained differences in performance could continue.
The research suggested that conflicts of interest between fund members and fund managers were structured in different governance models.
However, the principal of research house Chant West, Warren Chant, said the difference in performance between funds was not just about governance but also asset allocation.
He said the exposure of retail funds to listed equities had been a key differentiator in returns.
Chant said the value of liquidity delivered by exposure to listed investments could also not be underestimated.
Recommended for you
ETF provider VanEck has announced its intention to launch a uranium and energy solution as global political agendas point to expansion in this sector.
PIMCO has announced the launch of a new active fixed-income ETF, marking its fifth active solution on the Australian market after the launch of four ETFs earlier in the year.
With the Australian advice market being a target for US private equity firms, a US advice commentator has shared lessons from his overseas experience, and why PE may be less attractive than initially expected.
Financial advisers are reminded to ensure their CPD is up to date with the Financial Services and Credit Panel making its second determination in a week after an adviser failed to meet the requirements.