Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 423

Investing like Jerome Powell or the Future Fund

When I interviewed the father of Modern Portfolio Theory, Nobel Laureate Harry Markowitz, in 2013, he told me, "Nobody seems to be very good at picking the market." 

Elsewhere, Warren Buffett also said (referring to his colleague, Charlie Munger):

"Charlie and I spend no time thinking or talking about what the stock market is going to do, because we don’t know. We are not operating on the basis of any kind of macro forecast about stocks. There’s always a list of reasons why the country will have problems tomorrow.”

And Ray Dalio, Founder of Bridgewater Associates, advised:

“You should have a strategic asset allocation mix that assumes that you don’t know what the future is going to hold.”

If it's good enough for Harry, Warren and Ray, it's good enough for me ...

And yet most of us try some version of tactical asset allocation, especially in a year when major stockmarkets delivered 20% plus returns and cash paid zero. For portfolio returns, asset allocation was never more important, and gains like this will be difficult to repeat in the low-return markets of the future.

APRA turning up the heat on our super funds

There is now an extra factor in play on asset allocation at large super funds, with APRA releasing the first results under the Your Future, Your Super Performance Test regime. It has started with 76 MySuper funds and 13 products failed to meet their benchmark. It’s a fearsome ‘name and shame’ exercise that is causing agony among suffering funds and their trustees. The so-called ‘failing products’ include funds from Asgard, Christian Super, Colonial First State, Commonwealth Bank, Energy Industries, Maritime Super and BT Super.

APRA does not downplay the severity of the consequences:

“Trustees of the 13 products that failed the test now face an important choice: they can urgently make the improvements needed to ensure they pass next year’s test or start planning to transfer their members to a fund that can deliver better outcomes for them ... Trustees of failed products are required to write to members by 27 September 2021 advising them of their Performance Test outcome and providing the details of the ATO’s YourSuper comparison tool.”

Many trustees claim the process is unfair, because it benchmarks their funds against the wrong asset mix. It is especially cruel when equity markets have performed strongly and a fund is compared with a more growth-oriented benchmark. For example, Maritime Super CEO Peter Robertson argues it was benchmarked against a risker exposure: 

“The benchmark we are being measured against was 66% growth assets. At times we had as low as 21% growth assets, so we are being measured against a benchmark which is going to be hard to achieve.”

Maritime Super says it employed a dynamic asset allocation process to reduce its exposure to equity markets, which was appropriate at the height of COVID, but it missed some of the 2020/21 bounce. Like it or not, the future viability of ‘failed funds’ depends on performance relative to the benchmark chosen by APRA, even if the action of the fund’s trustees and the asset allocation was appropriately determined and right for their own members. We cover this debate in more detail here.

How important is asset allocation for returns?

It’s obvious that deciding between cash, bonds, equities and the rich range of asset types has considerable impact on returns, although the often-stated claim that 90% of investment returns can be attributed to asset allocation is disputed. This number comes from famous research called The Determinants of Portfolio Performance by Brinson, Hood and Beebower in 1986 and updated in 1991. In this context, selecting stocks is barely worth the effort.

But even if 90% is correct, it is not overly helpful, because as Harry, Warren and Ray said, it is difficult to make the best asset allocations in advance. Returns from each asset class fluctuate so much that nobody can time the portfolio changes accurately. We all wish we had invested 100% in equities a year ago but the only investment decisions that matter now must be made today and in the future. One look at the Morningstar Gameboard below shows the winners and losers change every year. 

The Brinson study also looked at only equities versus cash and bonds and there are far more choices available now offering greater opportunities and mixtures of factors that determine returns.

With continuous switching of asset allocations a fraught process bound to fail, and it’s better to understand long-term goals and risk tolerances and look decades ahead rather than selecting short-term swings.

Asset allocations of major players

Let’s consider how some major asset allocations are set up, starting with the most powerful person in the financial world, the head of the US Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell.

Powell is obviously investing for his own personal circumstances, but as someone who controls the destiny of markets in every announcement he makes, perhaps there is some comfort for growth investors in his high allocation to equities. It’s not fair to think his US policy decisions are influenced by the composition of his own portfolio, and he also manages to keep fixed interest and market neutral supporters happy with a decent allocation to those assets.

For a point of comparison, Powell is 68-years-old, his annual salary as Chair of the Fed is US$203,500 and his net worth is estimated at US$55 million. The assets below are based on his 278e filings to the US Office of Government Ethics disclosing the source of all income and assets in broad ranges.

Jerome Powell’s Estimated Asset Allocation, 2019

Source: Calderwood Capital Research

What about the biggest asset allocators in Australia, the Future Fund and the sum of our large superannuation funds? Although they are all long-term investors, there are significant differences.

We have explained the way the Future Fund works previously such as here and here, so we will not repeat these points, other than to note that its allocations to private equity at 17.5%, infrastructure and timberland at 7.4% and alternatives at 13.5% are much higher than by typical superannuation investors. It also splits its international shares evenly between global and emerging markets.

The extent of this variation is best illustrated by comparing the Future Fund with large super institutions, which place far more in Australian equities and debt securities.

As a long-term investor, private equity may help maximise returns by capturing an illiquidity premium and giving exposure to themes not available in liquid markets. Investments in infrastructure and timberland provide inflation protection and portfolio diversification. The Future Fund has historically employed a ‘barbell’ strategy, meaning there is a considerable allocation to cash but also a sizeable exposure to riskier strategies. Holding cash allows the Fund to be opportunistic and buy cheaper assets in times of market corrections.

Can a retail investor replicate the Future Fund?

In the year to 30 June 2021, the Future Fund delivered a return of 22.2%, similar to the best-performing super funds but above the average fund with larger exposures to listed equities. Its ‘private’ assets are judged to be less volatile in price so the risk-adjusted returns are impressive (although simply because an airport is listed does not mean it is a more volatile asset than an unlisted airport, even if its value changes more often).

The biggest difficulty for retail investors replicating the portfolio like the Future Fund is the access to the world of private equity, debt and infrastructure, as the Fund's latest update reports:

“Listed equity markets performed strongly while our significant exposure to private equity has delivered excellent returns. During the year we committed to additional opportunities in Australian infrastructure, notably through a further investment into Powering Australian Renewables (PowAR), and a new partnership with Telstra InfraCo Towers."

Until recent years, it was more difficult for retail investors to access ‘alternative’ assets such as private equity, infrastructure, corporate bonds, securitisations and long/short funds. However, while not rivalling the Future Fund in range and access, the available assets have expanded including dozens of funds listed on the ASX and Chi-X, accessible in the same way as any listed share.

Another factor for a retail investor with a large SMSF that does not concern the Future Fund is the need to ensure enough liquidity to pay personal pensions. 

As articles have appeared in the media this week saying it is not possible for a retail investor to replicate the Future Fund, here are some examples of what is possible, predominantly in the listed space to illustrate ease of access (these are not recommendations although the author owns investments in many of these funds).

  • Pengana Private Equity (ASX:PE1)
  • WAM Alternative Assets (ASX: WMA)
  • Partners Group (unlisted private equity)
  • Argo Global Listed Infrastructure (ASX:ALI)
  • Magellan Core Infrastructure Fund (CHX:MCSI)
  • Thorney Opportunities (ASX:TOP)
  • Bailador Technology (ASX:BTI)
  • Gryphon Capital Income Trust (ASX:GCI)
  • Metrics Income Opportunities (ASX:MOT)
  • Metrics Master Income Fund (ASX:MXT)
  • Qualitas Real Estate Income Fund (ASX:QRI)
  • NB Global Corporate Income Trust (ASX:NBI)
  • Perpetual Credit Income Trust (ASX:PCI)
  • Coolabah Active Composite Bond (CHX:FIXD)
  • Janus Henderson Tactical Income (CHX:TACT)
  • Absolute Equities Performance Fund (ASX:AEG)

And of course a vast range of thematic or sector specific ETFs and unlisted funds accessible via platforms or directly with managers.

This does not replicate the number of direct opportunities available to the $200 billion Future Fund or the large super funds, but moving beyond equities and bonds into non-traditional asset classes is easy for anyone.

What about expected returns?

The wonderful returns achieved in recent decades from a traditional 60/40 or 70/30 growth-defensive fund will not be replicated in coming decades. Those portfolios benefited from a 30-year interest rate rally and rerating of equity P/Es. For an analysis of the expected future returns from these balanced portfolios, see the White Paper from UBS in this week’s newsletter, linked here.

To quote the conclusion from UBS from that paper:

“The run-up of equities in the last few months continues to pull some future returns into the present. Our expected returns for equities - especially US equities - are the lowest in years. Pockets of equities outside the US offer more compelling expected returns.

When it comes to asset returns and inflation, we see that the market is little prepared for a sustained breakout of price pressures. A disruptive repricing of inflation risks will affect all markets - in the short-run there is no place to hide from negative real returns.

We expect alternatives to suffer the least as commodities, gold and real estate gain relative to other asset classes. Again, the nature of inflation will be important. Inflation tied to a more robust growth backdrop should benefit real estate, while a Stagflation would probably be very positive for gold. Commodities would probably be one of the drivers in inflation and clearly should do better in an inflationary growth environment.

In short, we believe that the market opportunities to truly profit from inflation are few.”


Graham Hand is Managing Editor of Firstlinks. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any investor. 


September 14, 2021

Would be interested in any views on a contrarian view on Private Equity?
e.g. The Myth of Private Equity by Jeff Hooke

Graham Hand
September 11, 2021

Thanks for the feedback, Mani. And they are outstanding results over 17 years, a lot more than good luck.

September 11, 2021

What index was used for Aust and Int shares and small cap.

Graham Hand
September 11, 2021

Hi Mani

Thanks for your enquiry.

You should be able to download the original of the chart here:

On the indexes used:

Cash - RBA Bank accepted Bills 90 Days
Aust. Fixed Interest - Bloomberg Ausbond Composite 0+ Yr TR AUD
Intl. Fixed Interest (H) - BBgBarc Global Aggregate TR Hdg AUD
Global REITs (H) - FTSE EPRA Nareit Dv REITS TR Hdg AUD
Aust. Equity - S&P/ASX 200 TR
Small Caps - S&P/ASX Small Ordinaries TR
Intl. Equity - MSCI World Ex Australia NR AUD

September 11, 2021

Graham, Many thanks for your info.The data lets me have a base to accurately compare my super fund. It has been going now for 17 years , nearly all Aust shares and has achieved 13.5%per year,which I worry is good luck. I read your note each week, and enjoy your presentations to the ASA Regards

September 05, 2021

There is a question Graham as to whether there is value in replicating a structure set at a different time. Take infrastructure for example. The FF made large scale direct infrastructure investments many years ago. Subsequent investments by FF focus on growth to those existing investments. Since the FF made those original investments cash rates have declined substantially and as a result significantly increased the capital value of those real assets substantially lowering their rates of return. Would the FF have made those decisions today is an important consideration when thinking about following their or other groups leads.

Graham Hand
September 05, 2021

Fair point, Mark, investing is about the future not the past. But Joe Biden is pushing through a multi trillion dollar infrastructure programme, and events such as Hurricane Ida, the New York floods, climate change and cybersecurity will convince the public and politicians that infrastructure spending is essential. So these funds have plenty of runway (oh, yes, and airports) and interest rates are going nowhere so governments can fund cheaply.

September 05, 2021

Future Fund +/- is no better than a good Super Fund, especially when you strip out the costs of dealing with individual Members

Where the Future Fund is "at risk" is it's offshore exposure. At it's heart, the Future Fund is building Capital to provide for future Pensions - in that respect, it's role is to fund a future "annuity stream". Critically all those future liabilities are in A$'s. If it was an "annuity provider" it would have to match those future A$ liabilities with a high proportion of A$ assets and it simply doesn't. In the jargon, a massive "mismatch". Works when the A$ is declining, would look real ugly if the A$ went back to parity with the US$

Does not mean they should not do it, but everyone should understand the risk and keep eyes wide open!

September 05, 2021

Due to its size and structure I suspect the FF avoids a whole layer of fees that an individual has to pay. This needs to be taken into account.

G. J
September 04, 2021

Problem is , they're all listed. They behaved exactly the same way as the other listed equity on the ASX last year. So in terms of piece of mind and less volatility they don't offer anything more than other listed equity.

Graham Hand
September 04, 2021

Hi CJ, I deliberately gave mostly listed for ease of access. It is true that many therefore might have the volatility of a listed asset, but there is no difference over the long run between, say, a listed or unlisted infrastructure fund that holds the same assets. So you might need to be patient and take cash you need from other assets.

If you want unlisted funds for piece of mind, then you could check the mfund range:

Denis Ives
September 03, 2021

The FF was set up to cover ongoing Commonwealth super obligations. Must have achieved that by now. What happens next? What are the implications?

September 02, 2021

comparing the asset allocation of the massive Future Fund with most people's Super funds is not really relevant.
ordinary people need to GROW their money so as to have sufficient later in life. simply preserving wealth is not sufficient when you don't personally have enough wealth. Whereas it is understandable that the Future Fund places more emphasis on less exposure to drawdowns. I would too if I was already a billionaire.

Graham Hand
September 02, 2021

Thanks CC but do you think the FF does not want to grow its assets? They are not simply preserving wealth. This is from their latest results: “The return of 22.2% for the year to 30 June 2021 is an exceptional result. This has delivered
$35.7bn to the people of Australia, growing the Fund to $196.8bn. The Fund has now earned $136.3bn on the capital of $60.5bn contributed by the Government back in 2006/7, meaning it has tripled the money." The 10-year return is 10.1% pa against a target of 6.1% pa. I'd take that any day for my growth portfolio over 10 years.

September 02, 2021

over the past 10 yrs the S&P500 index has risen by 18% p.a and my unlisted private equity fund ( Partners Group ) by 12.7% p.a so I don't consider 10% p.a that impressive. My wife's industry Super fund has also returned 10% p.a over the past 10 years
for the record, my portfolio rose by 28% last FY

September 05, 2021

Please call out the FF for what it is - I am sick of the media portraying it as a fund for all Aussies - its NOT. Lets get serious here FF is not delivering for people of Australia - it is delivering to the over funded/entitled bureaucrats superannuation liabilities - established by themselves! Where did the seed money come from - the sale of Telstra - an asset that did belong to the people of Australia. Hmmm always back self interest it wins!

September 04, 2021

I looked up Partners Group website but could not see any performance data or how to invest. Would appreciate a "heads up" on this if you don't mind.

Graham Hand
September 04, 2021

Hi CJ, I have asked Jono Abraham from Partners Group to reply, let's see what he says.

Jono Abraham
September 06, 2021

Hi GJ,
The fund that CC was referring to which has returned 12.7% pa over the last ten years was the Partners Group Global Value Fund. Further information on Partners Group's Funds can be found at our Australian website. The lastest monthly reports and PDS can be found in the 'Our Funds' section.
I hope that helps,
Jono Abraham
Partners Group

Kien Choong
September 02, 2021

I've long felt that any Australian retail investor should be able select the Future Fund as a superannuation fund with no annual fees and some minor administrative fee for withdrawal related costs.

And every child should be given a $1,000 account at the Future Fund on turning 12 y.o.

Just my suggestion!

September 02, 2021

Great idea, but as always, the devil is in the detail, which gen public is not privy to.

Ramon Vasquez
September 08, 2021

Excellent idea , Kien !
Regards , Ramon .


Leave a Comment:



Listed bond funds leap into market gap

Why bank hybrids are far too expensive

Corporate bonds: why now and in what structure?


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.

Welcome to Firstlinks Election Edition 458

At around 10.30pm on Saturday night, Scott Morrison called Anthony Albanese to concede defeat in the 2022 election. As voting continued the next day, it became likely that Labor would reach the magic number of 76 seats to form a majority government.   

  • 19 May 2022

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.

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.