Just under one-third of older Australians will be able to realise their post-retirement dreams, with the rest left disappointed due to a lack of savings, research showed.
REST Industry Super's online poll found that while 52 per cent of Australians have a retirement bucket list, only 32 per cent will be able to tick off the items on the list.
More than half (53 per cent) of respondents said they want to travel the world, while 43 per cent want to go on a road trip, and 30 per cent want to leave an inheritance to their children.
REST Industry Super CEO Damian Hill said that while it was good to see Australians with grand plans, he is most concerned that one in six (17 per cent) thinks they will not be able to cross any items off their list.
"Too often people underestimate the cost of retirement, and the gap between what people think they need to retire on and what they require in reality is often significant," Hill said.
He added a bucket list could be a motivational tool to save for retirement.
"Consolidating your superannuation accounts, salary sacrificing and taking an active interest in how your superannuation is invested are small steps you can take earlier in life to maximise your retirement returns," he said.
The online poll included 1000 respondents over the age of 55.
The March 2014 Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia Retirement Standard showed a couple wanting a comfortable retirement needs $57,817 a year, while a couple wanting a ‘modest' retirement lifestyle need $33,509 a year.
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.