Under 40s are the most likely to have lost superannuation, but many are doing nothing about it, according to Westpac.
Westpac's Lost Super Report found almost two-thirds of under 40s surveyed are likely to have lost super, but more than half of those under 40 are not making any attempt to recover it.
Younger generations were also more likely to 'not know' if they had any lost superannuation in the $17.4 billion.
But the report found there is a lack of engagement around retirement planning across all generations and many Australian's underestimated the amount they would need to retire on.
Fifty-two per cent of Australians said they would need less than $600,000 to retire comfortably, but according to Westpac Group head of superannuation Melanie Evans, women would need $740,000 and men would need $680,000 for a retirement with a yearly income of $45,000.
Westpac found younger generations have greater job mobility, with 42.2 per cent of under 40s saying they have had more than four employers over the past decade - a likely cause of lost superannuation.
Evans said while it was easy to lose super through changing employment and address, the process to reclaim was simple, and Westpac had opened their branches to assist Australians, two-thirds of which said they would like more help to locate lost super.
Minister for Financial Services and Superannuation Bill Shorten welcomed the initiative, saying it complemented the Government's work to consolidate super accounts, including recent improvements to the SuperSeeker website.
The Pilbara was found to be the top spot for lost super, the Westpac report said.
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.