Super system fee structure driving SMSF growth

19 March 2013
| By Staff |
image
image
expand image

The superannuation industry's fee structure is hitting members hard and causing them to move from retail and industry funds to self-managed super funds (SMSFs), according to LJ Financial private client adviser Duncan Brown.

He said the funds under management (FUM) fee structure, which operates as a percentage-based fee based on a member's account balance, was old-fashioned and did not incentivise performance.

"It is a bit of an old-fashioned system, and a lot of people have a problem with it — when the global financial crisis hit and the markets were tumbling, individuals were still getting charged fund management fees on top of their losses."

He said most funds hit members with administration and management fees as well, and as a result of all of the fees many members could get a better return from a term deposit.

It was no surprise that so many members were switching across to the self-managed sector, he said.

The misalignment of interests between fund managers and members was another factor driving the shift to the self-managed sector, Brown said, because retail and fund managers had a short time horizon while investors invested for the long-term.

"Unfortunately, retail and industry fund managers have the target to produce profit in the short term, whereas members are in it for the long-term growth, meaning the investment strategy is not aligned," he says.

Brown said herding was still a problem and led fund managers to believe all they needed to do was out-perform the average to continue to be paid their bonuses and pay rises, even if they had lost members' money.

"The fund can still be classed as a market leader, despite passing over negative returns, as its returns were above the market average," he said.

Brown said the first problem with the superannuation system was that funds under management were too large at $1.4 trillion — which meant legislation had to cater to the masses.

"This might not suit what an individual might be trying to achieve from their super, due to the lack of investment flexibility," he said.

Poorly structured retail funds that did not cater to the individual's financial goals limited growth opportunities and further drove investors towards SMSFs, according to Brown.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Recommended for you

sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

4 months 1 week ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

4 months 2 weeks ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

4 months 2 weeks ago

Blue Owl Capital, a US asset manager with its eye on ‘marquee investors’ like super funds, has announced the appointment of a senior Future Fund executive as its newest m...

4 days 12 hours ago

Australia’s second-largest super fund has confirmed it is expanding its presence in the UK following significant investment in the region....

5 days 4 hours ago

While the Financial Advice Association Australia said it supports a performance testing regime “in principle”, it holds reservations about expanding this scope to retirem...

4 days 19 hours ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND