Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Register

31 August 2026

Home / 211

Clear winner and loser in 2017/2018 survey

Over 400 readers completed the short survey on expectations for market returns in this new financial year, and the results suggest optimism for overall share market performance.

Winner of the expected best-performer category

Unhedged international equities (46% of votes)

Equities received strong support, with unhedged global shares (46%), Australian small caps (22%) and Australian equities (15%) adding up to 83% of votes. There was little support for fixed interest, and with cash at only 4% of votes, few investors see a market rout.

Particularly notable is that international equities have come first in four of the previous five financial years, so there’s either little support for ‘reverting to the mean’, or people are extrapolating from recent performance. How much does the concentration in Australia’s market among banks, miners and retailers play a role?

Only 2% expect residential property to be the best, but as in all years, that’s where most of the investment dollars will go.

Winner (or loser) of the expected worst-performer category

Cash (33% of votes)

Expectations for the worst performer were somewhat more balanced, with cash and fixed interest adding up to 57% of nominations. Taking a look at the Morningstar numbers for each financial year since 1998, cash has only come bottom twice. There are usually one or two other asset classes that put in a bad year and underperform the defensive characteristics of cash. Last year, cash outperformed listed property and fixed interest.

A healthy 22% expect residential property to perform worst, which is a decent vote for the market finally losing its head of steam (in Sydney and Melbourne, at least).

Most nominated range for S&P/ASX200 Total Return Index

+5% to +10% (47% of votes)

A strong 87% of votes placed the Australian index in the range of 0% to 10%, with most above +5%. Given the US market is at all-time highs and Australian and global valuations look stretched, and with US rates rising, this is an optimistic note for steady performance. There was stronger support for +10% and better (7.5%) than a bad result of -10% or worse (only 3%).

We will report on the results of these predictions at the end of 2017/2018.

  •   20 July 2017
  • 4
  •      
  •   
4 Comments
Paul
July 20, 2017

Graham, on your newsletter talking about ripping off existing customers, my bank offers walk in or “blow in” new customers 3% pa on their Maxi Savings account. Despite being a loyal customer over many years, they could only get me up to 2.7% after first stating that 2.55% was the rate for “high worth” existing customers. Bring on the Royal Commission!

Andre Lavoipierre
July 20, 2017

Graham, You state that last year cash outperformed listed property and fixed interest. Also it appears that respondents to the survey have fixed interest as third worst performing asset class in 2017-18. I think your next survey should split fixed interest into fixed and floating because the floating rate securities have done very well over the past year eg Esltree Funds Management, who invest in listed convertible preference shares and subordinated notes (commonly known as hybrids) returned 13.7%...not a bad return considering _the volatility is only circa 22% of its comparable equities.

Kenneth Maurice Ellis
July 20, 2017

Why are so many wanting to reduce the profit of our banks when the vast majority of all superannuation funds hove some exposure to them. Is it a desire to have a lower value for our superannuation? or just that people like bitching?

Cheers, Ken Ellis

Kevin
July 22, 2017

Hiya Kenneth.

I think it is human nature to bitch,and accept that if everybody repeats something then it must be true, and great wisdom.

I keep annual reports.Looking at WBC and ANZ around 1991 when they were suffering, net interest margins were around the 4.5% mark.When they came back to profit most years the profit as a %age of assets is 1%.That is almost constant from 1991 until now.Net margins have fallen to around the 2% mark (less for NAB).Yet since then politicians,crowds,experts, all repeating the same thing, huge profits (where),how could it not be true.

CBA funds me so in 1996 if my memory is correct they almost had 100 billion in gross assets.Net profit of almost $1 billion.Net margins of around 3.8 or3. 9 %.They have been so constant in net profit,always 1% or 1.1% of gross assets.Net margins down to around 2.07%.

I would think shortly CBA will have gross assets of $1 trillion,which will produce net profit of $10 billion.No doubt politicians will have their crocodile tears,vote for me and I will do something about these huge profits.I wish they would explain how 1% is a huge profit margin after taxes and expenses

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

The 60:40 portfolio ... if no longer appropriate, then what is?

Diversification is the foundation of a solid portfolio

Firstlinks is sponsored by:
banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

After four decades advising investors, there are a few common mistakes I've seen SMSF investors make. From holding too much cash and chasing yield to overtrading and trusting tips. Are these errors costing you?

Why have Australian living standards 'fallen' and how do we fix it?

For the last few years there has been much talk of a 'cost-of-living' crisis in Australia and of 'falling living standards'. Lately this has flared up again with the pickup in inflation resulting in a renewed fall in real wages.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

Four options for an income investor’s next dollar

What if Australia’s golden age of dividends is ending? Rather than overhaul your portfolio, it may be worth considering where new capital can work harder. I discuss four income strategies and the trade-offs behind each.

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

New data challenges the idea that Australians are underspending their super. The bigger issue may be helping retirees navigate complexity, make confident decisions and use their savings to support security, wellbeing and choice.

The missing link in the CGT debate

A little-noticed consequence of Labor’s tax changes could have implications well beyond investors’ tax bills. The issue raises bigger questions about incentives, capital allocation and the drivers of long-term economic growth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

The ageing ‘crisis’ has not and will not happen

Rising age dependency is frequently treated as a warning sign for economies. But when actual workforce participation is examined, a strikingly different picture emerges about ageing, productivity and economic sustainability.

Retirement

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Shares

Four charts that expose market concentration risk

Investors have recently been rewarded for backing market leaders, but history suggests this eventually comes at a cost. Now may be the time to review whether your portfolio is carrying unintended risks beneath the surface.

Investment strategies

The case for gearing beyond property

Most Australians gear into property but ignore shares. That may be a mistake. Used carefully, geared equity strategies can enhance long-term returns, reduce cash tied up in growth assets and support retirement income goals.

Economy

Australia's $1 trillion debt pile

The headlines exclaiming that Australian government debt has hit A$1 trillion and US government debt has hit $40 trillion has turned heads, but how serious are they really? Will Australia's mix of debt create challenges?

Economy

Has 100 years of growth made us any happier?

For decades, GDP has been the benchmark for economic success, but has it made us materially happier? If happiness does not rise in lockstep with prosperity, are we overlooking what constitutes a successful society?

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

Site Map

About Firstlinks

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
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. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. 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.