While all sectors of the superannuation industry had a solid boost in assets over the 2013 financial year, the self-managed super fund (SMSF) sector was the only sector to increase member numbers, according to figures released yesterday by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA).
APRA's Annual Superannuation Bulletin for the financial year to 30 June 2013, revealed total superannuation assets increased by $219.8 billion — or 15.7 per cent — $1.6 trillion.
Industry funds had the largest asset increase of all sectors over the period (21.5 per cent), followed by small funds — which include self-managed super funds (SMSFs) at 15.5 per cent. Public sector funds are on par with small funds, while retail and corporate funds' assets grew by 13.9 per cent and 9.1 per cent respectively.
However, member accounts across the industry slightly decreased over the year, with SMSFs being the only sector to experience an increase in this area.
"This reduction in member accounts coincides with the amendment of the Superannuation (Unclaimed money and lost members) Act 1999 which came into effect in 2013," APRA's report read.
Industry super fund member accounts decreased by 140,000 over the year, public sector funds by 35,000, corporate sector by 38,000 and retail by 939,000.
Meanwhile, the number of small fund member accounts grew from 904,000 in 2012 to 968,000 as of 30 June last year.
Furthermore, the number of SMSFs grew by 7.1 per cent during the year, while APRA-regulated entities with more than four members decreased by 8.4 per cent.
Jim Chalmers has defended changes to the Future Fund’s mandate, referring to himself as a “big supporter” of the sovereign wealth fund, amid fierce opposition from the Coalition, which has pledged to reverse any changes if it wins next year’s election.
In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges.
Chant West analysis suggests super could be well placed to deliver a double-digit result by the end of the calendar year.
Specific valuation decisions made by the $88 billion fund at the beginning of the pandemic were “not adequate for the deteriorating market conditions”, according to the prudential regulator.