The SMSF statistic is the sleeper detail in this piece: 24% of super assets are now self-managed, and it keeps climbing. Mandatory architecture got everyone to the table; conviction got the most engaged investors to take the controls.
What Australia built is not just a retirement system; it is a generational proof that when capital becomes universal, the desire to understand it follows. The real US policy question is not whether workers could build wealth this way, but whether the country trusts them enough to try.
You note that returns for the last give years in supers have been good (8.2% last 5 years per the super website).
But how do we know that is good?
One thing I've been trying to find is Alts returns from respective Supers. I've seen references like "look, we invest in PE, and our returns are good" but nothing that SHOWs that they've been satisfactory (i.e. returned a premium over public markets, etc.). Are you aware of any evidence on Alts returns? Also do you know what Super investors pay to invest in Alts? There may be some benefit there (though it would be reflected in returns if we could see them).
Lobbyists in the US conflate the stronger Aussie retirement system, and the fact that supers invest in Alts, and then turn around and say "we should invest in Alts in 401(k)s.".....when the real impact comes from saving more $$$.
Also: on auto-enrollment, i think that the figure is now more than half of US employers auto-enroll.
The SMSF statistic is the sleeper detail in this piece: 24% of super assets are now self-managed, and it keeps climbing. Mandatory architecture got everyone to the table; conviction got the most engaged investors to take the controls.
What Australia built is not just a retirement system; it is a generational proof that when capital becomes universal, the desire to understand it follows. The real US policy question is not whether workers could build wealth this way, but whether the country trusts them enough to try.
Nice post! Lots of good info in there.
You note that returns for the last give years in supers have been good (8.2% last 5 years per the super website).
But how do we know that is good?
One thing I've been trying to find is Alts returns from respective Supers. I've seen references like "look, we invest in PE, and our returns are good" but nothing that SHOWs that they've been satisfactory (i.e. returned a premium over public markets, etc.). Are you aware of any evidence on Alts returns? Also do you know what Super investors pay to invest in Alts? There may be some benefit there (though it would be reflected in returns if we could see them).
Lobbyists in the US conflate the stronger Aussie retirement system, and the fact that supers invest in Alts, and then turn around and say "we should invest in Alts in 401(k)s.".....when the real impact comes from saving more $$$.
Also: on auto-enrollment, i think that the figure is now more than half of US employers auto-enroll.
Appreciate it!