Will COVID-19 kill the balanced option?BY ELIZABETH MCARTHUR | THURSDAY, 9 APR 2020 3:54PM As consumers saw their superannuation balances nosedive when the COVID-19 pandemic began wreaking havoc on the market many were surprised to learn their retirement savings weren't quite as safe as they thought, reigniting the debate around 'balanced' investment options.
Upgrade your subscription to access this article
And gain access to:
And moreRead our full COVID-19 news coverage and analysis here. Related News |
Editor's Choice
IFM looks offshore for renewable lending opportunities
Australia is losing out to the global market and increasingly to Asia when it comes to renewables lending from one of the country's biggest fund managers, with IFM Investors executive director and co-head of APAC diversified credit Hiran Wanigasekera saying the risk-return trade-off is simply better ...
GQG records further outflows despite positive returns
GQG Partners recorded net outflows of $3.3 billion (US$2.3bn) in September, extending a difficult year for the ASX-listed fund manager despite positive investment performance across its four primary strategies.
Mason Stevens farewells managing director
Mason Stevens managing director, global investment service has wrapped up his seven-year tenure at the company.
ASX to defend legal action brought by shareholder
The Australian Securities Exchange said it plans to defend the claims submitted by one of its shareholders on ASX's behalf, stating the applications filed are "not in the best interests of the company."
Further Reading
Products
Expert Feed
When geopolitics becomes a portfolio risk
Geopolitics is back - again - and Australian investors can no longer treat it as distant background noise.
Does association membership still matter?
With all the changes the advice sector has experienced in recent years, such as regulatory reform and increased education and professional standards ...
Digital assets and where they stand in 2026
So far in 2026 digital assets have captured the headlines largely for the wrong reasons, but that doesn't tell the full story.
Rethinking default design in a changing market environment
The evolution underway in the US DC system highlights the value of periodically reassessing default design assumptions.
Featured Profile
Cliff Man
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
ETF SHARES MANAGEMENT LTD
ETF SHARES MANAGEMENT LTD
ETF Shares chief executive Cliff Man spent his career automating, building and challenging established systems. Now, he is betting that Australia's ETF market has room for something different. Vinny Vucago writes.
The Financial Standard podcast Tune in each week as we discuss the latest developments in Australia's wealth management industry. |  |
Oh dear, here we go again. May the Good Lord preserve us from experts - especially the eloquent and those in ASIC and APRA.
'Balanced'? How did we come to use a nebulous term like that. Surely all funds are balanced, but differently. Or do we mean some are 'unbalanced'? In short, the term is meaningless.
And 'conservative'! Shouldn't all life savings be invested conservatively? But, then again, what does conservative investment mean? Different things to different people, and different things according to its purpose. Advisers, of course, need to be wary of ASIC's cast-iron interpretation!
Then there's 'growth'! Growth of what? Yes, yes - of course - interpreted and bandied about by all and sundry to mean growth in market values - the quantum. And how successful has chasing growth in market values been? The All Ords today stands where it stood 14 years ago!
And what if - as should be the case with all who are retired, and arguably those saving for their retirement - you are investing to grow your Income Stream! (Then again, SuperFunds - to their shame - don't disclose Income in their 'Change in Value' reporting. Why? Because they're chasing Growth, presumably. Oh dear.)
Then there's good old 'defensive'! Defence against what? Of course: the V-word! (Volatility, that is, not Virus.) And of course, for the growth chasers (read Analysts, Strategists - aka Speculators, Gamblers), it means that proportion that you invest in non-growth assets; effectively, that proportion you don't invest. Because you're scared of volatility. (Not loss, mind you: just volatility.)
No wonder we have a whole industry in disarray! We neither agree on what we are talking about, nor agree on the meaning of the terminology we use to talk about it!
Imagine the state of the medical profession in similar state
Post script
I am, by nature, education and experience, a conservative investor. My own funds are conservatively balanced, mainly in good old-fashioned Australian 'blue chip' Industrials, other than for a small Cash reserve.
Why? Because, firstly, I like their defensive quality of generating a consistent, reliable and growing income-stream. And secondly, because I'm not prepared to stake my financial security - the security of my retirement income - on speculative capital growth. And I don't have to be concerned with the V-word.
So, ASIC, how do you rate my risk profile?