Failed YFYS funds need to be in ‘crisis mode’

3 September 2021
| By Jassmyn |
image
image
expand image

Most of the 13 superannuation funds that failed the Your Future, Your Super (YFYS) performance test will not recover and they should be in “crisis mode”, according to a panel. 

Speaking at the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST) Superannuation Investment Conference, Parametric manager for research and strategy, Whitlam Zhang said looking back to the prudential regulator’s introduction of their super heatmaps, of the underperforming funds that were identified, 47 no longer existed.  

“It's not hard to imagine that Your Future, Your Super, probably will have a similar effect,” he said. 

“For the underperforming funds, they don't really have the luxury of time. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) has given them until the end of the year to come up with their plans and so they'll need to make some pretty difficult decisions soon.  

“Crisis mode really means spending a lot of time figuring out what options they have between now and the end of the year. So, if they want to look at mergers, looking at what merger partners might make sense. 

“The regulator is expecting trustees to figure out what to include as part of their contingency plans but that comes at a cost because all the time that's now spent on responding to Your Future, Your Super could have been spent on actually running the fund.” 

Zhang said funds would be thinking about how to adapt their investment strategies to the YFYS environment, and how they thought about their risk budgets as the test penalised funds for taking active risk. 

He said funds looking to minimise the risk of failing the test would potentially aggressively dial down the amount of active risk in their fund and that would impact the level of future returns the funds could expect.  

Zhang said funds would also continue to look for opportunities to lower their fees but there were concerns about going too far.  

“Where does cost cutting actually result in the possible detriment of member outcomes? What if, for instance, a fund couldn't hire the staff they need to either implement their portfolios effectively, or deliver quality advice to their members. This is just something that we just got to be very careful about, so that we don't end up with a race to the bottom,” he said. 

Zhang noted that no funds was immune to the test and could become a deep rabbit hole that could consume huge amounts of time for already busy teams and would serve as a distraction.   

Read more about:

AUTHOR

 

Recommended for you

 

MARKET INSIGHTS

sub-bg sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

Squeaky'21

My view is that after 2026 there will be quite a bit less than 10,000 'advisers' (investment advisers) and less than 100...

6 days 22 hours ago
Jason Warlond

Dugald makes a great point that not everyone's definition of green is the same and gives a good example. Funds have bee...

6 days 23 hours ago
Jasmin Jakupovic

How did they get the AFSL in the first place? Given the green light by ASIC. This is terrible example of ASIC's incompet...

1 week ago

AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust have posted the financial results for the 2022–23 financial year for their combined 5.3 million members....

9 months 1 week ago

A $34 billion fund has come out on top with a 13.3 per cent return in the last 12 months, beating out mega funds like Australian Retirement Trust and Aware Super. ...

9 months ago

The verdict in the class action case against AMP Financial Planning has been delivered in the Federal Court by Justice Moshinsky....

9 months 1 week ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND