WA Super has relaunched its Sustainable Future investment option which will focus on investments promoting global change through impact investing.
The new investment vehicle would offer a diversified portfolio of high-potential, publicly traded companies whose products and services would be “geared towards solving the world’s biggest social and environmental problems.”
This would include companies whose objectives included alleviating hunger, ensuring safe water supplies, increasing access to health care, education and financial services as well as reducing carbon emissions and bridging the “digital divide”.
According to WA Super’s chief executive, Fabian Ross, the feedback from both members and employers indicated that investing in companies that really make a difference was important to them while the potential of those companies remained underappreciated by the investment community.
“While our previous Sustainable Future option did have some responsible investing practices, we believe it is important to offer our members the chance to invest in an option that seeks to promote meaningful change through impact investing,” Ross said.
“One of the other exciting benefits of this style of investing is that now our members will also have access to information that measures the social or environmental impact that these companies are actually making.
“Key performance indicators are developed by the investment manager for each investment opportunity to help clarify and track a company’s progress towards its impact goals.”
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.