Following an 18.42 per cent return for REST Industry Super's Super Core Strategy in 2012-13, Super Ratings has recognised it as the best-performing balanced option over the decade to June 2013.
Super Ratings also ranked the investment the number one balanced option over five and seven years, and second over the last financial year. The top-performing fund for the last financial year was BT's Super for Life 1960s Lifestage, which returned 18.6 per cent.
"The REST Super Core Strategy, where the majority of REST members are invested, returned 6.09 per cent per annum over five years, 5.88 per cent per annum over seven years, and 8.11 per cent per annum over 10 years for the period ending 30 June 2013," REST Industry Super chief executive Damien Hill said.
"This excellent performance reaffirms our robust investment process, which we believe is a prerequisite for delivering competitive long-term returns."
REST chief operating officer Paul Sayer said equity market performance was key to the fund's results.
"Our bias to overseas equities and an unhedged position to overseas equities further enhanced our performance, taking advantage of a buoyant overseas share market," he said.
"Outperformance over benchmarks in some of our key asset classes, including equities and bonds, has also been instrumental in boosting returns."
REST was also awarded Best Fund in the Investments category in Chant West's annual Super Fund Awards this 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.