The biggest challenge for SMSF investors
Investor Insights - Monthly news for investment professionals 3 September 2015

It will come as a surprise to few readers that financial services is Australia's largest industry, contributing around 9% of Australia's GDP. Equally, both the superannuation system's pride of place within this industry (with $1.85 trillion under management, the world's fourth largest superannuation market) and the spectacular growth of the self managed superannuation fund (SMSF) sector (total assets of $594 billion in March 2015 compared to $355 billion in June 2010) are well known and understood.

In that context, the almost continuous regulatory review of the industry and SMSF sector in particular is also no surprise. But the ceaseless debate also presents its own risks. The competing claims and counter-claims of various interest groups and industry sectors can generate an overwhelming noise. This noise can make it difficult to spot the real and present dangers in the sector. What's more, whilst there is always a valid argument for principled, forward-looking regulation to head off future crisis, this should not come at the expense of the really pressing current issues.

This article focuses on the current issues in SMSF allocation in the light of the most recent ATO statistics on the sector. The conclusions are surprising, at least to those who haven't been tracking these allocations over the last five years. However, as a matter of fact, the conclusions today are virtually the same as they would have been had this article been written in 2010. This, of course, means that for better or for worse, SMSF asset allocation has been remarkably stable over time.

But first the caveats

Before we start, we should first understand the limitations of this discussion. First, our analysis depends on the quality of the statistics we are considering. There are significant limitations with the ATO SMSF data that must be borne in mind. One example is the shortcomings on the 'overseas investments' statistics, which can overlook international investments via collective investment vehicles like managed investments schemes, listed investment companies and exchange traded funds. This will be discussed further below.

The second is the "flaw of averages". ATO statistics are aggregated. Few, if any, individual SMSFs reflect the asset allocation of the sector. The trustees of each fund will therefore continue to face their own individual asset allocations strengths and weaknesses.

That said, the benefit of relying on the hard data - noting its limitations - is that we take the subjective element off the table and can therefore focus both on the trees and the woods.

The key asset allocation issues

Over exposure to property?

The first issue that has been discussed at some length is whether SMSFs are over-exposed to property, or perhaps just to residential property. This issue can be disposed of quickly. As the graph below shows, SMSF property allocations have been remarkably stable over five years, ranging between around 14% and 16%. Whether one is speaking of residential or non-residential property, the story over the period is one of great stability in allocation.

What's more, this exposure seems relatively consistent with the approach of large superannuation funds, with their teams of asset consultants and highly paid industry experts. For example, Australia's largest superannuation fund, Australian Super, reports an exposure to direct property in its 'balanced option' of 9%. When this exposure is considered in the light of exposures to other, arguably related asset classes that SMSFs generally cannot access, like infrastructure (13%), the SMSF allocation looks very reasonable.

The notion that SMSFs are being overexposed to residential property (or are a significant contributor to an alleged housing bubble) also looks very shaky. SMSFs hold around 4% of total assets in residential property and have done for five years. There is no sign of a 'boom' in exposures and when current exposures are considered as a proportion of the total housing market ($21.8 billion out of a circa $3 trillion asset class) all sting is taken from the argument.

The boom in LRBAs?

The exposure of SMSFs to borrowing through Limited Recourse Borrowing Arrangements (LRBAs) has been perhaps the most controversial issue in the sector. But do the statistics support the fuss?

First, recall that these borrowings are generally taken out to purchase assets, particularly property (both commercial and residential). Then remember that these SMSFs could invest without controversy in a geared property trust. Given that, is it so unreasonable that SMSF trustees could make an investment decision in which they manage the gearing arrangements themselves? One would, of course, wish to avoid abuses and ASIC has been working hard at weeding unscrupulous professionals out of the industry. One would also perhaps argue that an LRBA is a tool for a sophisticated investor. But with current exposures sitting at around 1.6% and declining, are there really signs that this is a substantial issue for the sector?

NB: the apparent spike in LRBAs is June 2013 was largely caused by a change in the way the ATO collected statistics, rather than a sudden change in the underlying trend.

Underexposure to overseas assets?

It is frequently argued that SMSFs are severely underexposed to overseas assets. ATO figures support this assertion, putting overseas exposures across asset classes at just 1%. However, there are very good reasons for suspecting that these substantially understate overseas exposures because of the way that the ATO categorises the data. Most individual SMSF exposures to international investments are made through investment vehicles, like managed investment schemes, LICs and ETFs. All of these would be categorised by the ATO as being domestic investments.

Getting accurate figures is difficult. A number of SMSF administrators produce regular reports that show exposures to international equities. Based on those, an estimate of 10-15% seems broadly to be the ballpark, noting that it is always difficult to asset international exposures in multi sector funds and similar vehicles.

So the problem may not be as pronounced as is generally argued.

What are SMSFs doing with cash?

SMSF cash allocations are a frequent hot topic and rightly so. The tendency has been to criticise SMSFs for over-exposure to cash, although this may not be entirely fair. Allocations have fluctuated over the five year period between 26% and 32%. This compares with an exposure of 3% (range: 0%-15%) for the Australian Super 'balanced option', although the more conservative 'stable option' has 24% in cash (range: 0%-50%).

Clearly, SMSF trustees are placing a high value on capital stability and regular, reliable income. Inarguably, cash has long delivered capital stability for Australian investors, so this part of the argument is hard to fault. It is the second limb of the argument - reliable income - that current circumstances suggest requires some analysis.

The RBA tracks retail interest rates on a number of bases. The graph below shows the spread between one year bank term deposits and quarterly inflation (CPI) prints. Whilst healthy margins were available five or so years ago, the margin now is so narrow as to mean that interest rates are barely positive in real terms.

The second issue for SMSF trustees to consider in reviewing their cash allocations is how these allocations change over time. As the graph below shows, there is a genuine negative correlation over time between cash exposures and stock values. That is, cash exposures decrease (implying increased portfolio risk) as stock values increase and, arguably, themselves become subject to higher risk. SMSF trustees should consider whether this correlation is indicative of an unintended, perhaps unconscious, 'risking up' of portfolios at the very time that market risk is increasing.

Key conclusions

There are three clear conclusions from these numbers for SMSF advisers:

  1. For capital stability, cash has and continues to be an effective investment for SMSF trustees.

  2. However, care needs to be taken to ensure allocation levels are reviewed constantly and referred back to the overall investment objectives and risk profile of the SMSF.

  3. Cash is not delivering significant real returns for investors. Given long term global interest rate expectations, it is unlikely to do so for an extended period. SMSF trustees seeking income need to consider other options. This will present challenges. As we have previously discussed, the ‘equities for income’ trade is crowded and talk of bond bubbles persists. Trustees should be considering alternative yield plays. La Trobe Financial’s investment objective is to deliver reliable yield for investors via Australia’s largest peer to peer investment scheme and award-winning Pooled Mortgages Option – currently paying 5.40% for a twelve month investment.

Market update and investor briefing

Invest 30 minutes of your time to hear from our quarterly market update and investor teleconference.

We will discuss the domestic and international economy, with our “headwinds and tailwinds” analysis. We will also update you on the Australian property market and values.

Event Details

Date: Thursday, 15 October 2015



12:00pm - 12:30pm  (AEST)
  QLD 11:00am - 11:30am  (AEST)
  NT 10:30am - 11:00am  (ACST)
  SA 11:30am - 12:00am  (ACDT)
  WA 10:00am - 10:30am  (AWST)


Connect through your computer or by telephone

Further details will be provided on registration.

Best regards,

Chris Andrews
Vice President,
Chief Investment Officer

view newsletter in a browser
Ratings And Awards

The above awards and ratings were given to the Pooled Mortgage Option within the La Trobe Financial Mortgage Fund and may be viewed

La Trobe Financial Asset Management Limited ABN: 27 007 332 363 and AFSL No: 222213 is the issuer and manager of the La Trobe Australian Mortgage Fund. It is important for you to read the Product Disclosure Statement for the Fund before you make any investment decision. The PDS is available on our website or by calling 1800 818 818. You should consider carefully whether or not investing in the Fund is appropriate for you.

- The rates of return from the Fund are not guaranteed and are determined by future revenue of the Fund and may be lower than expected. Investors risk losing some or all of their principal investment. The investment is not a bank deposit.
- Past performance is no guarantee of future performance.
- Withdrawal rights are subject to liquidity and may be delayed or suspended.
- The award and ratings were given to the Pooled Mortgages Option within the La Trobe Australian Mortgage Fund.
- Any rating is only one factor to be taken into account in deciding to invest.

1. Zenith's "recommended" rating indicates that it has high confidence in the manager meeting its objectives. The Zenith Investment Partners ("Zenith") ABN 60 332 047 314 rating referred to in this document is limited to "General Advice" (as defined by section 766B of Corporations Act 2001) and based solely on the assessment of the investment merits of the financial product on this basis. It is not a specific recommendation to purchase, sell or hold the relevant product(s), and Zenith advises that individual investors should seek their own independent financial advice before investing in this product. To view the relevant research information, please visit The rating is subject to change without notice and Zenith has no obligation to update this document following publication. Zenith usually receives a fee for rating the fund manager and product against accepted criteria considered comprehensive and objective.
2. SQM Research - 4 stars to 4.25 stars - superior, suitable for inclusion on most Approved Product Lists. To view the relevant research information, please visit This rating will not take into account your, or your clients' objectives, financial situation or needs. It is up to investors to consider whether specific financial products are suitable for your objectives, financial situation or needs. Research houses receive a fee from La Trobe Financial for rating the product.
3. Lipper Leaders Rating Total Return (Score – 5) Lipper Ratings for Total Return reflect funds’ historical return performance relative to peers. The ratings are subject to change every month. The highest 20% of funds in each peer group are named Lipper Leader or a score of 5 for Total Return. Lipper Leader ratings are not intended to predict future results and does not guarantee the accuracy of this information. More information is available at Thomson Reuters Copyright, All Rights Reserved.
4. Australia Ratings (AFSL 346138) makes every effort to ensure the reliability of the views and rankings expressed in its reports and those published on its websites. Australia Ratings research is based upon information known to it or which was obtained from sources it believed to be reliable and accurate at time of publication. However, like the markets, it is not perfect. This report is prepared for general information only, and as such, the specific needs, investment objectives or financial situation of any particular user have not been taken into consideration. Individuals should therefore discuss, with their financial planner or advisor, the merits of each rating for their own specific circumstances and realise that not all investments will be appropriate for all subscribers. To the extent permitted by law, Australia Ratings and its employees, agents and authorised representatives exclude all liability for any loss or damage (including indirect, special or consequential loss or damage) arising from the use of, or reliance on, any information within the report whether or not caused by any negligent act or omission. If the law prohibits the exclusion of such liability, Australia Ratings hereby limits its liability, to the extent permitted by law, to the resupply of the said information or the cost of the said resupply.
La Trobe Financial is one of Australia's leading independent credit specialist Fund Managers. Its business includes residential mortgages, commercial mortgages, and investment services operating one of Australia's largest Mortgage Funds under AFSL 222213. It employs over 150 staff and has managed over AUD$10 Billion covering over 100,000 investment grade assets since inception in 1952.

Copyright 2014 La Trobe Financial. All rights reserved. No portion of this may be reproduced, copied, or in any way reused without written permission from La Trobe Financial.

La Trobe Financial Services Pty Limited - Australian Credit Licence Number: 392385
La Trobe Financial Asset Management Limited - Australian Credit Licence Number: 222213

This publication does not constitute financial advice and should not be relied upon as such. It is intended only to provide a summary and general overview on matters of interest and it is not intended to be comprehensive. You should seek your own financial or other professional advice before acting or relying on any of the content.
Terms & Conditions | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy