Bank superannuation funds for staff have outperformed the super funds they sell to the public, according to Industry Super Australia (ISA).
ISA said over a ten-year period Commonwealth Bank’s not-for-profit corporate staff fund outperformed by 2.8 per cent per year on average on one of the largest retail super funds it recommended to customers.
Also, ANZ’s not-for-profit staff super fund outperformed one of its retail super products for the general public by two per cent on average.
ISA chief executive, David Whiteley, said: “These differences will be of deep concern to policy makers and the general public”.
“Clearly these institutions have the capacity to deliver better returns to members of the public, but their need to deliver profits to shareholders may be a stumbling block,” he said.
“The banks should explain how it is the super funds for themselves can outperform their super funds they sell to the public so considerably.
“The three million members of these public offer funds deserve to know whether the banks are putting the interests of shareholders before fund members.”
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.
well, of course we all knew that would be the case, its just like industry super fund V retail super fund