Superannuation funds may have performed well year-on-year, but they have still not entirely recovered from the global financial crisis (GFC), according to the latest industry data.
Data from Chant West has found that growth funds have now returned 30 per cent since the end of February 2009, after falling 27 per cent during the GFC.
Chant West principal Warren Chant said in normal times that level of return would be quite impressive, but the damage done by the GFC has still not been fully repaired.
He said a further 6 per cent was needed to get back to pre-GFC levels achieved in late October 2007.
This year, the median growth fund returned 9 per cent to 30 June, coming in slightly under the 10.4 per cent achieved last year.
He said that while returns were positive, they could have been better if it were not for a tumultuous financial year.
“The first nine months saw strong domestic and global share markets, which are the main drivers of growth fund performance, push the running return for the year up to 10 per cent.
“In the June quarter, however, we saw share markets falter on the back of ongoing concerns about a slowdown in China, negative economic data coming out of the [United States] and a resurfacing of the European debt crisis.
Chant added the strength of the Australian dollar had also taken off about 3 per cent from the typical growth fund performance.
He said that he expected industry funds would finish the year slightly ahead of master trusts on average due to their lower allocations to unhedged international shares and bonds.
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.