Less than a quarter of the 82 MySuper licenses issued to the end of October include a lifecycle investment strategy and only four of those strategies are designed to operate past retirement.
According to a paper released by Mercer examining lifestyle investing and trends in MySuper only 15 MySuper licenses will offer a lifecycle strategy with the remaining 67 offering static investment positions.
Of those 15 offerings, eight are being offered by retail providers, six by industry providers and one by a corporate superannuation provider with the four strategies operating past retirement being offered by retail providers.
The paper stated "the fact that the MySuper legislation only covers the period up until retirement is a likely contributing factor to the relatively low number of lifecycle funds that provide members with the scope to remain invested throughout their retirement years".
The paper also stated that retail and industry funds have adopted different internal processes to manage the age requirements of MySuper fund members.
The majority of industry funds have adopted 'member switching' from growth to defensive assets while the majority of retail funds will use cohort funds which change the underlying strategy as time progresses.
Mercer also reported that while the legislation for MySuper funds allows for four separate fee levels it was likely those using cohort funds would adopt a single fee.
"While information in this area is relatively sparse for now, we have observed a number of retail funds opting to employ passive management in some or all of their underlying portfolios."
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.