Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 303

Where is the super industry heading?

While the 2019 Federal election may lead to significant superannuation changes, 2018 set the long-term agenda for structural reform. The Financial Services Royal Commission led the way, pushing every major bank to plan an exit from wealth management, once seen as the fast train to growth against the slow train of basic banking services. The Commission's revelations wreaked havoc on financial advice, while recommending the extension of the Banking Executive Accountability Regime (BEAR) to superannuation.

In addition, the Productivity Commission supported the removal of underperforming funds and changes to the default system with a 'best in show' proposal. Regulatory changes included Protecting Your Super to remove small balance funds from the super system, while more power was given to APRA and ASIC.

In this context, KPMG's 'Super Insights 2019' is a timely look at the present and future of the superannuation industry. Their work includes a website report and a fascinating interactive dashboard with great detail on which large APRA funds are growing and which are struggling, and their market shares.

In 2018, despite market volatility especially in the final quarter, the superannuation industry delivered strong outcomes for members overall. The APRA-regulated sector grew by 10.3% over the year, with closing assets nearing $1.8 trillion. SMSFs experienced slower growth, with assets increasing by 6% in 2018 to close at almost $750 billion. In total, the assets supporting superannuation closed 2018 at $2.7 trillion, some 39% higher than the market capitalisation of the Australian share market.

Number of funds to halve under industry consolidation

Faced with structural and legislative changes, KPMG expects significant industry consolidation in APRA funds in the short-to-medium term, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Projected number of funds, 2019 to 2029

Industry funds to dominate growth, but SMSFs hanging on

The reduction in large APRA funds from 217 to 85 will create some enormous asset management companies, with considerable clout in all sectors of the Australian economy. In particular, a reduction in industry funds from 38 to 12 will see the power of the big funds taken to another level.

KPMG's interactive feature shows how fund size has changed between 2004 and 2018. Back in 2004, the retail funds of NAB/MLC, CBA/CFS and Westpac/BT dominated superannuation, and the industry funds looked like minnows. While these three retain high positions, AustralianSuper is now the largest, and QSuper, Unisuper and First State Super will probably overtake the retail funds in the next few years. For the first time in history, the industry funds in total were larger than retail funds in 2018.

At the end of 2018, as shown in table 2, AMP was second to AustralianSuper by fund size, with substantially more member accounts. AMP's ranking is unlikely to last, based on latest flow statistics.

Table 2. Market position, asset and members of retail and public funds 

KPMG expects industry funds to overtake SMSFs in 2020, holding over $2 trillion in assets by 2029, as shown ion Table 3. Retail funds will still grow, but at half the rate, reaching $1.2 trillion in a decade. The entire superannuation industry at the moment is about $2.7 trillion. By 2029, total super assets will reach $5.4 trillion, dwarfing anything the ASX can achieve.

Table 3. Forecast assets by superannuation sector

Despite the optimistic outlook, KPMG's Paul Howes added:

"There is no room for complacency, including in the industry sector. During 2019, it is incumbent on all trustees of all funds to review their operations, business models and product portfolios. We believe that in all sectors, significant opportunities exist for funds to develop innovative retirement products to suit the needs of a variety of members.

We are concerned that the potential changes to the advice landscape, including the additional educational requirements proposed by FASEA, the removal of commissions and banning of advice fees being charged on MySuper products will potentially impact the number of members that receive advice. This may have the impact of reducing the demand for pension products going forward and may result in more individuals taking lump sums out of the superannuation systems, which may put more pressure on the social security system, which is unlikely to be a sustainable long-term position for the Federal Government. As such, KPMG believes funds will have to review their advice models to ensure that they can continue to deliver advice to members in an efficient, affordable and compliant manner to facilitate the continued growth of the retirement income product market.”

Footnote, not from the KPMG Report

If Labor's proposals on the refund of franking credits become legislated, many SMSF assets will switch into industry and retail fund structures, including the wraps and direct investment options. In its costing of Labor's proposal, Treasury wrote that the revenue impact will be reduced by SMSFs retaining franking credits through switching to APRA funds:

"This behavioural response is assumed to be greater for higher wealth SMSFs ... Assets that shift into APRA funds are assumed to continue to draw the benefit of the franking credit since most APRA funds are in a net taxpaying position. Some other SMSFs will rebalance their portfolios away from franked dividend paying shares towards other forms of income to compensate for the fall in after-tax returns on shares in the absence of refundability. These other forms of income could include fixed income, property trusts, managed funds or offshore equities."

It will be interesting to see how KPMG amends its 10-year forecast in 2020 if Labor's proposal is implemented.


Graham Hand is Managing Editor of Cuffelinks. The information in this article is drawn from the KPMG Super Insights 2019 Report. See Report for further disclaimers. This summary is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any investor, and does not seek to cover the detail in the report.


Jan H
April 27, 2019

Glenn H: Further to my previous response to you, I forgot to say that those poor wage-earners actually get $18,200 tax-free before they have to pay any tax. SMSFs cannot take advantage of the tax-free threshold ($18,200) because their tax is zero.. Now, the TFT is several times more than the cash refunds some SMSFs and individuals receive (see Treasury stats).
Remember, Labor raised the TFT in 2012/13 from $6000 which was raised from $5400 when the cash refunds were introduced.
Now, Tony, if Labor wants Budget repair it could lower the TFT and remove cash refunds so the status quo pre-2000 would be restored. But, bearing in mind cash refunds were part of the GST compensation package which included the $6k TFT and family benefits totally 2.4 billion. (Refer Howard's speech, during which he said: "The new tax system is designed to reward Australians and their families with lower income tax and increased family benefits." (June 2000 -

Now Labor wants to take away one arm of that GST package but retain the rest. It's a very lopsided policy so definitely not in accordance with the principles of taxation.

April 26, 2019

That's because Bowen doesn't know. It is pretty obvious from the policy and answers to questions that they do not understand how SMSFs work

Glenn H.
April 26, 2019

Chris Bowen , will not advise if accounting charges and ATO SMSF levies will come out of non refundable franking credits or will these charges further reduce a retirees income , can anyone throw any information on this .

April 27, 2019

Glenn H: Currently, a SMSF in pension mode with no accumulation account, cannot deduct expenses. The compensation is that the fund pays no tax. However, deductions e.g. compulsory ASIC fees/ levies, audit fees plus accountant fees can be offset by the cash refund. The way I see it, SMSFs will not only lose the value of their franking credits but will also have to pay the fees from the fund. So, if FCs are $5000 and fees are $2000, then the loss is $7000. I haven't heard any commentators raise this further reduction of income Of course, it will put many SMSF members below the Govt pension income but all the Labor camp say is :suck it up" because we have to balance the books at your expense for the benefit of all those wage-earners who are being sucked dry by your tax dodging loopholes.


Leave a Comment:



On franking, all public funds are not the same

The death of the single-industry superannuation fund

The road to super hell is paved with good intentions


Most viewed in recent weeks

Is it better to rent or own a home under the age pension?

With 62% of Australians aged 65 and over relying at least partially on the age pension, are they better off owning their home or renting? There is an extra pension asset allowance for those not owning a home.

Too many retirees miss out on this valuable super fund benefit

With 700 Australians retiring every day, retirement income solutions are more important than ever. Why do millions of retirees eligible for a more tax-efficient pension account hold money in accumulation?

Is the fossil fuel narrative simply too convenient?

A fund manager argues it is immoral to deny poor countries access to relatively cheap energy from fossil fuels. Wealthy countries must recognise the transition is a multi-decade challenge and continue to invest.

Reece Birtles on selecting stocks for income in retirement

Equity investing comes with volatility that makes many retirees uncomfortable. A focus on income which is less volatile than share prices, and quality companies delivering robust earnings, offers more reassurance.

Comparing generations and the nine dimensions of our well-being

Using the nine dimensions of well-being used by the OECD, and dividing Australians into Baby Boomers, Generation Xers or Millennials, it is surprisingly easy to identify the winners and losers for most dimensions.

Anton in 2006 v 2022, it's deja vu (all over again)

What was bothering markets in 2006? Try the end of cheap money, bond yields rising, high energy prices and record high commodity prices feeding inflation. Who says these are 'unprecedented' times? It's 2006 v 2022.

Latest Updates


Superannuation: a 30+ year journey but now stop fiddling

Few people have been closer to superannuation policy over the years than Noel Whittaker, especially when he established his eponymous financial planning business. He takes us on a quick guided tour.

Survey: share your retirement experiences

All Baby Boomers are now over 55 and many are either in retirement or thinking about a transition from work. But what is retirement like? Is it the golden years or a drag? Do you have tips for making the most of it?


Time for value as ‘promise generators’ fail to deliver

A $28 billion global manager still sees far more potential in value than growth stocks, believes energy stocks are undervalued including an Australian company, and describes the need for resilience in investing.


Paul Keating's long-term plans for super and imputation

Paul Keating not only designed compulsory superannuation but in the 30 years since its introduction, he has maintained the rage. Here are highlights of three articles on SG's origins and two more recent interviews.

Fixed interest

On interest rates and credit, do you feel the need for speed?

Central bank support for credit and equity markets is reversing, which has led to wider spreads and higher rates. But what does that mean and is it time to jump at higher rates or do they have some way to go?

Investment strategies

Death notices for the 60/40 portfolio are premature

Pundits have once again declared the death of the 60% stock/40% bond portfolio amid sharp declines in both stock and bond prices. Based on history, balanced portfolios are apt to prove the naysayers wrong, again.

Exchange traded products

ETFs and the eight biggest worries in index investing

Both passive investing and ETFs have withstood criticism as their popularity has grown. They have been blamed for causing bubbles, distorting the market, and concentrating share ownership. Are any of these criticisms valid?



© 2022 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.