Financial Standard Comments - FSC questions pertinence of APRA super stats The Financial Services Council has questioned the pertinence of figures released by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority last week that show the investment returns of not-for-profit superannuation consistently outperforming those of their retail counterparts. https://www.financialstandard.com.au/feed/latest?story=37144561 Mon, 13 Jan 2014 14:57:28 +1100 Mon, 13 Jan 2014 14:57:28 +1100 en-AU Copyright 2026 Financial Standard 5 Comment by John Simpson (EzePlan) What rubbish. APRA are useless! Total Fund performance is meaningless!!! Industry Funds performed "well" only because they had large volumes invested in cash and fixed interest during the GFC, unless they were like MTAA.
A REAL Adviser actively managed clients' portfolios in terms of asset allocations and funds managers over the past 5 and 10 years and achieved returns many times greater than Industry Funds for clients who understood the value of active management and the relatively low level of risks involved compared with staying in cash or FI over long periods.
The suggestion by BRAGG that older retirees are more conservative is wrong unless they have a very low life expectancy. Older retirees need income and growth to keep up with inflation and the fast increasing costs of living, and especially the very high out of pocket costs of medical services! Oldies can't afford proper cancer treatment unless they have substantial bank balances.
Real advisers have achieved total returns of between 50% and 110% over the past two calendar years when the World has recovered so well. This leaves all the APRA figures for DEAD!

Reply to article

For original story, Click Here.

]]> John Simpson (EzePlan) Mon, 13 Jan 2014 14:57:28 +1100