Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 168

Low SMSF returns highlight value of retirement advice

Much has been made of the current low-return environment and its potentially long-lasting consequences. People using retirement projection tools might find their return assumptions are unlikely to materialise.

In light of this uncertainty, retirees need to factor risk into their retirement planning, and advisers should make them aware of a range of investment outcomes.

Retirees can then use this information to decide when they can afford to retire, or what level of spending they can sustain over the course of their retirement.

2015 SMSF returns and fund balances

Research conducted by Accurium and the SMSF Association of over 65,000 SMSFs looked at how the retirement adequacy of Australia’s SMSF trustees has changed over the 2015 financial year. The study found the median balance for two-member SMSFs increased by 3.0% over the year to $1.1 million, based on a median investment return of 4.2%. This is lower than the average return over the previous five years of 6.2% per annum for the SMSFs in the study.

Chart 1: Median SMSF balances and investment returns as at 30 June

Note: Imputed investment returns are calculated net of administration expenses and gross of income tax. These imputed investment returns should not be used in comparisons with other superannuation sectors.

Fewer SMSFs are large enough for comfortable standard

The research used Accurium’s healthcheck to determine retirement adequacy, a retirement projection model that considers 2,000 economic and demographic scenarios and provides estimates of the savings needed to afford different lifestyles with different levels of confidence.

The research found that a 65-year-old couple will need $702,000 in savings to be confident of affording the ASFA Comfortable Retirement Standard, which is currently $58,922 per annum for 65-year-old couples. This is at the 80% confidence level, meaning retirees still have a one in five chance of outliving their savings. It also assumes an asset mix consistent with the ATO average for SMSFs in pension phase. Age pension entitlements, tax and superannuation settings are allowed for.

The results are testament to the success of the SMSFs in the sample, given about 70% of the couples in the research have enough in their funds to afford this lifestyle. However, that comes with an important caveat. Lower-than-average returns in 2015, together with a weaker economic outlook, mean fewer SMSF couples are in this fortunate position compared with a year ago, where 75% were on track for a comfortable retirement.

Lower expected returns are also affecting those aspiring to a higher standard of retirement living. For example, the study found a 65-year-old SMSF couple will need $1,886,000 in savings to be reasonably confident of having an income of $100,000 p.a, as shown in Chart 2. The proportion of 65-year-old SMSF couples with sufficient assets in their SMSFs to support this lifestyle has fallen from 34% to 29% over the past year. (Spending levels are assumed to keep pace with inflation, and allow for changing circumstances as retirees age. Specifically, spending is assumed to reduce by 10% once retirees reach age 85 and to drop by 30% once one spouse passes away).

Chart 2: Savings needed for different spending levels with 80% confidence vs. median SMSF balance

SMSF retirees can also achieve higher retirement living standards with savings outside of superannuation. However, the study highlights the need for trustees either in or preparing for retirement to review their plans.

The research also analysed the sustainability of individual SMSF households’ retirement plans based on their desired spending levels and their savings, both inside and outside their SMSF. Of the 1,500 households in the study, three in five could be reasonably confident that their savings would last as long as they do.

Our study also found a clear correlation between wealth and sustainability. It might seem intuitive that those with more wealth are more likely to sustain their desired retirement spending levels. However, the study revealed that SMSF retirees do not automatically increase their spending in line with greater wealth.

Value of retirement risk advice

SMSF trustees and their advisers need to assess their plans before and during retirement, including how much trustees need to spend per annum, how to meet essential expenditure and how to adjust asset allocations as a response to lower-yielding markets.

To do this effectively, advisers, or those going it alone, need the right projection tools (such as Accurium’s retirement healthcheck) that don’t just use average returns and lifespans, to consider a range of outcomes. To access Accurium’s research paper SMSF Retirement Insights: Are trustees prepared for retirement?, prepared in conjunction with the SMSF Association, click here.

 

Melanie Dunn is SMSF Technical Services Manager at Accurium. This article is information only and illustrates the value of providing retirement risk advice to SMSF trustees and is not intended to be financial product advice, legal advice or tax advice, and should not be relied upon as such. Advisers and SMSF trustees may need to seek appropriate professional advice.

 

  •   11 August 2016
  • 6
  •      
  •   
6 Comments
Ashley
August 11, 2016

I have never met anyone who has their SMSF as their sole source of retirement capital and income. I have never met any SMSF investor who is happy with the ASFA retirement income levels. – eg who would be ‘comfortable’ on $58,922 pa?

Rob
August 11, 2016

I agree entirely with Ashley, on both counts.

PROPLANNER
August 11, 2016

^^^ Depends on where you live, as a 20 year Financial Planner we have bulk of our retired clients on or around this income level with combination of Private and DSS funded pensions. These people aren't traveling overseas each year, but are comfortable by their own definition.

Paul
August 11, 2016

Ashley,
Our SMSF is pretty much our sole source of retirement capital and income.
It is all invested in direct shares which I research. At 58 we are both retired and the fund now generates just over $100,000 in ff dividends and $43,000 in refunded franking credits; with both figures still growing thanks to some great mid & small cap businesses.
That's over $140,000 pa without selling one share.
We have a $150,000 term deposit 'insurance ' fund if divs get cut due to another GFC type event.
To be honest we are struggling to spend this annual income; let alone sell anything.
Very 'doable.'

Richard
August 11, 2016

Like Paul, I am retired with a wife, and no family living with us. We own our own home worth nearly $1m, bought for cash, and have a dividend income from shares and other interest paying investments from our SMSF of about $300k/yr....tax free. The occasional profitable sales are also tax free.
We also own shares outside the SMSF environment, but could live very comfortably without these, while watching the SMSF portfolio increase in value by >15%/yr.
So we are one family which is very happy with the SMSF environment, and find it difficult to be too critical of the government's attempt to curb what is basically a rort.

Gen Y
August 11, 2016

Richard, it is great that someone is calling it for what it is. There's been a lot of bashing of the Government's proposed changes on this site based on vested interests.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Meg on SMSFs: watch traps in EOFY contributions

Avoid these top five errors in your SMSF annual return

What is happening with SMSFs? Part 1

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Noel Whittaker’s take on the budget

Marketed as a fix for inequality and housing affordability, the latest budget instead delivers a tangle of tax changes that leave everyday Australians worse off.

Australia has no death duties. Technically.

Australia may not levy formal death duties, but a growing web of tax measures is quietly shaping what wealth passes between generations. Now, the 2026 budget adds another layer.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 662 with weekend update

The debate over the budget is increasingly shaped by frustration and perceptions of unfairness, rather than clear-eyed assessment of policy outcomes.

How inflation is quietly moving the goalposts on retirement

Inflation doesn’t just raise today’s bills - it quietly increases the amount needed to retire, while simultaneously making it harder to save. Three steps to take before June 30th to improve retirement outcomes.

How to minimise tax with a will

Inheritance tax implications in Australia may surprise some, as poor estate planning without proper wills or trusts can lead to costly tax bills and delays for beneficiaries.

Back to the future - Why indexing CGT is a good idea

A return to indexation of capital gains would be a fairer way to compensate households for the effects of inflation than the current discount. Importantly, it opens the door to future, broader reforms to stop the taxation of inflation.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

High quality businesses are on sale

Beneath the dominance of the ASX's largest stocks, much of the market has been left behind. High-quality companies are now trading at levels rarely seen, offering opportunities for investors willing to look deeper.

Investment strategies

The whirlwind is upon us

Something unusual is happening in markets. The winners are pulling further ahead at an extraordinary pace. As return dispersion hits extreme levels, volatility is rising and the investing landscape is becoming harder to navigate.

Strategy

Inequality destabilises economies

Extreme wealth concentration is no longer just a side effect of growth. As inequality deepens, its consequences are shifting from a social concern to a broader threat to economic stability and democratic resilience.

Investment strategies

Have AI’s four horsemen arrived?

AI exuberance is colliding with economic reality. Cracks are emerging as spending surges, ROI remains uncertain and enterprise behaviour shifts. The next phase may look less like an expansion and more like a reckoning.

Taxation

Budget tax changes only scratch the surface. Here are 4 reforms Australia needs next

The 2026 budget has reignited Australia’s tax reform debate, but more work remains. Beneath the surface lies a harder question: what structural reforms are needed to make the country's tax system fit for the future?

Taxation

Negative gearing: quarantined, not killed

The Budget's negative gearing changes defer deductions rather than deny them, yet a worked example shows quarantining can halve the tax benefit's present value for buyers of established dwellings.

Investment strategies

Family offices have quietly taken over Australian private capital

In just four years, Australia's private capital landscape has transformed. We are seeing changes across who deploys capital, how deals are structured and why new platforms and investor pathways are rapidly emerging.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 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.