Super switching hits new high

The number of Australians thinking of switching their super fund is at a record high, according to the latest data from Investment Trends.

The Investment Trends 2018 Super Fund Member Sentiment and Communications Report has found that the number of Australians thinking of switching their super fund is at a record high with seven per cent of members intending to leave their super fund in the next 12 months, up from the five per cent level recorded in previous years.

Commenting on the finding, Investment Trends senior analyst, King Loong Choi pointed to the data being driven by younger fund members.

“The growing intention to switch super funds is predominantly driven by younger Australians, with 16 per cent of those aged between 18 and 34 saying they intend to do so,” Choi said.

He said that while high fees were the key motivator for switching (30 per cent cited this), millennials were more likely to seek a fund that provided access to socially responsible investment options (14 per cent).

“Ethical and socially responsible investing is gradually gaining popularity, and super funds that cater to this growing demand will stand out among younger Australians,” Choi said.

Recommended for you



Everyone is switching to the HostPlus Balanced Index Fund, because some bloke with no shoes reckons it suits everyone.

Love it XY. I've personally had 3 people in the last 2 weeks , 2 friends and a client, tell me that they've done exactly that. His claim that it's the best option based on nothing else than the fact it has the lowest fee shows that he really has no idea about investing. Jump onto the Hostplus website and you'll see that the Balanced Index option has significantly underperformed the default Balanced option (which is really a High Growth option, but that's another topic altogether). That's in a very strong market where index options should really shine. Scott Pape has some excellent ideas for cash flow management but everyone that's taken his advice regarding the Hostplus option has been worse off.

Spot on Brett H.

I have just had a client do the exact same to save my fees of Approx. $1,200pa. She lost her underwritten life, TPD and IP as a single mum with a a disabled child, I pleaded with her to stay where she was and also that I turn off my fees as I believe that was best for her. I understand the need to rebuild after divorce but to make silly decision based on a $20 book that goes beyond cashflow makes me shake my head in shame that this is legal.

How can Scott Pape name a fund and an investment option in a book and call it General Advice? How much has HostPlus paid him?

Hopefully the RC picks this up as the biggest financial scam since the GFC!

There are a few journalists on this page, maybe someone can see the issue and pick up the issue and run with it.

ASIC have paid him and put him on their website as the go to man, it beggars belief.

There is a toxic, anti-adviser culture at ASIC. Plain and simple. They will stop at nothing to shame, undermine and defame our profession. Plugging barefoot advice (which relies on loopholes) and CPA Advice (which was built on anti-adviser rhetoric) are minor examples of their sick culture. What about their ambiguous attitude and poor guidance around BID. If 70% of students fail an exam, do you blame the kids or the teacher? And what about their reporting of the Life Insurance report 413. Apparently it was ok for their press release to infer the results of their research were indicative of ALL life insurance, rather than a small pocket of suspected churners, dobbed in by the life insurance companies. No clarification was given by ASIC when the media and politicians went rogue with their blatantly false reporting. If Hayne doesn't get to the bottom of what is going on at ASIC, he has missed the biggest problem of all, just like Ripoll did.

Noel Whittaker did the same thing but not as specific in his columns for 20 years and sold heaps of books as a result. I did complain once that some of the answers to readers questions could be taken as very personal advice and acted on, there were no General Advice warnings, but was told it's ok, Mr Whittaker is a legend who could do no wrong ( and of course the paper probably sold well due to him...).

So long as there is no SOA, then it is all fine. Our regulator is not looking after people who make bad financial decisions, nor is our regulator looking at people outside the industry. I believe ASIC only regulate the Corp act and people who are accredited, or claim to be accredited.

Add new comment