Value managers have emerged as best performers in both Australian and international share sectors in the latest InTech Sector Performance Survey for calendar 2002, occupying the top five positions in both lists.
Over the year, the Macquarie Australian Shares Value Index returned a negative 2 per cent — a far better performance than the 15 per cent fall in the Macquarie Australian Shares Growth Index.
“The results highlight the impact manager styles can have on a fund’s performance, with value style managers dominating for the second year running,” InTech senior consultant Andrew Korbel says.
Seven of the top 10 Australian share managers delivered positive returns despite the dismal performance of local shares which dragged the S&P/ASX 200 down 8.8 per cent.
Best local equities performer Tyndall posted a 6.9 per cent return for the year. Dimensional mounted a last-minute attack on Tyndall’s dominance in December with a strong return, but finished second for the year with a rise of 6.1 per cent. Investors Mutual (up 4.2 per cent), Lazard (up 3.2 per cent) and Perennial Value (up 2.3 per cent) also made the list of the top five Australian share managers in 2002.
Aberdeen was the best performing of the non-value style managers for the year, coming in ninth with a negative 0.3 per cent return.
The year 2002 was another terrible year for international share markets, delivering a double-digit negative return for the third consecutive year. With the benchmark MSCI World ex-Australia index showing a negative 27.4 per cent return, best performing manager Marathon came out shining with its negative return of 13.6 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.