Young Australians are putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to climate change, according to data from millennial superannuation fund Zuper.
The tobacco and nuclear-weapon free fund launched late last year helped Australians add green, health and technology investments to their super funds using exchange traded funds (ETFS) from BlackRock.
They were low-cost investment products that the wealth manager believed would benefit from global megatrends that reshaped economies, like climate change.
Jess Ellerm, Zuper chief executive, said half of Zuper members chose to remove carbon-intensive fossil fuels from their super when joining.
“Over two-thirds of our members also go the extra mile, adding at least one of our health, green or tech options to their super,” Ellerm said.
The fund had invested in global clean energy and water companies with those ETFs returning 21% and 34% this year.
Two-thirds of Zuper members are under 35 years-old, a demographic that had been increasingly frustrated by lack of action on climate change.
The data was released in the lead-up to Friday’s climate strike, which showed younger Australians actions had aligned with their attitude on the issue.
“You don’t necessarily have to leave work on Friday to show you believe in climate change - you can strike with your money by switching your super to be climate friendly,” Ellerm said.
“As our data shows, you’ll possibly increase your long term wealth in the process too.”
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.