Editor's Choice
Colchester launches first two ETFs in Australia
|Colchester Global Investors has handed a mandate to Equity Trustees for two new ETFs, making it's first offerings in Australia.
Local advice sector an attractive opportunity for global PE firms
|Local experts are observing a growing investment opportunity in Australian advice platforms that may not be as apparent for global investors, but since the sector is currently at its "infancy", many can capitalise on buying low and selling high.
FSC calls for tougher oversight of advice licensees
|The Financial Services Council (FSC) has called for a significant overhaul of ASIC's supervisions of financial advice licensees, arguing stronger regulatory oversight is needed to better protect consumers following recent industry failures.
State Street launches first active ETFs in Australia
|State Street Investment Management has launched two actively managed exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in an extension of its partnership with Blackstone Credit and Insurance.
Further Reading
Products
Featured Profile

Hugh Killen
MANAGING DIRECTOR AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY LIMITED
AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY LIMITED
For Hugh Killen, several life lessons came from spending time on pastoral properties stretching across northern New South Wales and South-West Queensland.







What a surprise that SMSF members are satisfied with the vehicle that they chose :)
Calculating performance as $ is not really comparing apples to apples, because you'd expect that SMSF's by their very nature to generally have higher balances than their industry fund and retail counterparts.
Of course a SMSF owner will be happier if their super fund grew by $100k* from $500k to $600k, compared to a retail/industry fund members who's balance grew by $10k (assuming no contributions) from $50k to $60k. After all that's a $90k better 'performance' yet still both returned 20%.
I appreciate that you can not properly compare by % because no SMSF is the same, buts its still wrong to say that SMSF are happier with performance because the measure is wrong/false.