The strongest determinant of performance for superannuation fund members is not simply scale, but the commercial model and profit orientation, according to Industry Super Australia (ISA).
ISA has used a submission to the Productivity Commission (PC) to once again stress its belief that industry funds outperform their retail counterparts.
Pointing to previous questions posed by the PC, the ISA noted that it had asked whether the greatest risk a member faced in superannuation was being defaulted into a poor-performing product.
It claimed this was not true, and that the statistical evidence showed “that the greatest risk to a member is being sold into a choice product”.
“The degree of risk is a function of the probability of a harm (in this case, low net returns), and the magnitude of that harm (in this case, the degree to which the returns are low),” the ISA submission said.
While acknowledging that some default funds fell into the bottom quartile in terms of net returns, the ISA submission argued that more than two-thirds had achieved returns in the top quartile.
“This means that, probabilistically, there is greater than a two-in-three chance that an account that was established through the default system will have received top quartile long-term net returns,” the submission said.
The firm is offering Australians lower fees and improved transparency with its exclusively exchange-traded fund (ETF) portfolios.
Senator Andrew Bragg has pressed funds that attended the super summit in the US, demanding answers on costs, compliance with their best financial interests duty, and the decision-making process behind their participation.
A top Treasury official has shed light on the confidential document that circulated among funds this month, telling Senate estimates Treasury is “testing a hypothesis”.
During Senate estimates, it was insinuated that if AustralianSuper had been a retail fund, it would have faced a much larger fine.