InvestSMART

The aim is bonds, not shares

While many super funds continue to lean towards growth assets, that may not suit all fund members.
By · 13 Jun 2012
By ·
13 Jun 2012
comments Comments
While many super funds continue to lean towards growth assets, that may not suit all fund members.

A great surge of money has flowed into global bond markets since the global financial crisis, but Australians have missed the boat. While investors in Europe and the US have switched from shares into cash and bonds, Australian investors have made a beeline for bank deposits.

The Boston Consulting Group's latest annual Global Wealth Report found households' shareholdings fell from 47 per cent of their portfolio in 2006 to 38 per cent last year, partly because of the falling value of shares, but also because of a switch to cash. Cash and deposits increased from 33 per cent to 42 per cent over the same period, while bonds held steady at 21 per cent (see table, below).

Investors in western Europe and the US had higher levels of bonds and lower levels of cash.

The head of financial services at BCG, Matthew Rogozinski, says the relatively high cash levels in Australia are the result of a combination of factors.

"Our sharemarket compressed more than others in the past 12 months and we had a high interest-rate environment, but there is probably also a predisposition among individual investors to look at cash and shares [to the exclusion of bonds]," he says.

LATE ACCESS TO BONDS

The head of family wealth advisory firm Professional Wealth, Doug Turek, says Australia is an anomaly in not having a properly functioning retail bond market. So when investors switched from risk assets to defensives after 2007, most of that money found its way into cash deposits, not bonds.

That situation is changing. Bond exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which have been widely available overseas for many years, were launched on the Australian Securities Exchange this year. The ASX also hopes to offer top-drawer Australian government bonds to retail investors by the end of the year.

"The irony is, it's a bit late," Turek says. "There are concerns that bonds are overvalued, and that is probably true. Many Australians missed the opportunity to invest when bonds were good value. Bond funds have averaged about 8 per cent (total return) since 2007, and some have been as high as 10 per cent, while cash has averaged about 5 per cent. That's a 2 per cent to 3 per cent premium for bonds, mostly due to capital appreciation."

Turek advises clients to stick to a pre-determined equity/bond mix and rebalance their portfolio after big market moves.

ALL-WEATHER COMBO

The exact portfolio split between growth and defensive assets depends on the individual. But for the defensive component of their portfolio, Turek recommends an all-weather combination of one-third cash and floating-rate investments, one-third fixed-rate investments, and one-third inflation-linked bonds. "In 2005-07, we were selling equities at high prices and buying bonds," he says. "As the [share]market fell, bonds went up so we started selling them to buy equities."

By contrast, Turek says, many investors had the wrong setting heading into the GFC and are still paying a heavy price for their lack of exposure to bonds.

He thinks shares are not undervalued yet, but if you invested in bonds that have gone up in value, the time is approaching to "buy shares bravely".

Rogozinski says another trend coming out of the GFC is a change in sentiment towards complex financial products among wealthy investors.

"There is a growing desire for simplicity and transparency," he says.

GROWTH-ASSET BIAS

While the rich have personally tailored portfolios, the vast majority of Australians have their retirement savings parked in their super fund's default option, which is designed to suit the many, not the few.

Super research house Chant West says the average super-fund default option had 73 per cent growth assets (shares, listed property and alternative assets) as of last December, and 27 per cent defensive assets (cash, bonds, direct property and alternatives).

In 2006, the split was the same but money has since been shifted out of shares and property into alternative growth assets, such as private equity, infrastructure and hedge funds. Cash levels grew from 3.7 per cent pre-GFC to 5.2 per cent last year.

The picture is very different for self-managed funds, which attract many of the millionaire investors surveyed in the wealth report.

According to self-managed super fund administration service Multiport, these funds had 43.1 per cent in shares as of last December, 26.7 per cent cash and 11.5 per cent in fixed interest, with the balance in property and alternatives.

DEFAULT SUPER FUNDS

Turek thinks default funds have too much exposure to shares. He uses a life-stage approach to asset allocation for his wealthy clients, slowly reducing risk assets as they age and approach retirement.

While some public-offer super funds have adopted a life-stage default option, there is less scope for people on lower incomes to access tailor-made solutions.

Most advisers recommend you don't consider self-managed super funds, which offer greater flexibility and tax benefits, until you have a minimum of $300,000 to invest.

The recent Roy Morgan State of the Nation Report found the average wealth of Australians over the age of 14 was $300,000 for city dwellers and $249,000 for their country cousins.

That's a far cry from the 132,000 Australian households with more than $1 million (excluding property and family businesses) unearthed by the Global Wealth Report. And as for the 228 Australian households with wealth of more than $100 million, they inhabit another planet.

Wealth of the nation

- Personal wealth in Australia stood still in 2011 at $US2.34 trillion, while global wealth grew 1.9 per cent to $US122.8 trillion.

- Australia has 132,000 millionaire households, placing us 17th in the global rankings. The US has the highest number of millionaires (5.13 million), ahead of Japan (1.59 million) and China (1.43 million), but millionaires are thickest on the ground in Singapore, where one home in 17 boasts a millionaire.

- The number of millionaires fell in the US and Japan, while wealthy households are popping up fastest in China and India.

- Wealth is spread more evenly across the community in Australia than almost anywhere. Around 19 per cent of Australia's private wealth is held by millionaire households, compared with 47 per cent in the US, and 60 per cent globally.

Source: Boston Consulting Group

Google News
Follow us on Google News
Go to Google News, then click "Follow" button to add us.
Share this article and show your support
Free Membership
Free Membership
InvestSMART
InvestSMART
Keep on reading more articles from InvestSMART. See more articles
Join the conversation
Join the conversation...
There are comments posted so far. Join the conversation, please login or Sign up.

Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…

According to the article, many Australians shifted into bank deposits rather than bonds after the GFC because Australia lacked a well-developed retail bond market and investors tended to prefer cash and shares. Experts also point to a compressed local sharemarket and a high interest-rate environment that encouraged cash holdings instead of moving into global bond markets.

The Boston Consulting Group found household shareholdings fell from 47% of portfolios in 2006 to 38% by last year, while cash and deposits rose from 33% to 42%. Bonds overall stayed steady at about 21% of household portfolios over the same period.

The article says bond exchange-traded funds (ETFs) were launched on the Australian Securities Exchange this year, and the ASX also plans to offer Australian government bonds to retail investors by the end of the year—improving retail access to bond markets in Australia.

Chant West data cited in the article shows the average super-fund default option had about 73% growth assets (shares, listed property and alternatives) and 27% defensive assets (cash, bonds, direct property and alternatives). That matters because default options are designed for the many, not tailored individuals, and may leave some members with higher equity exposure than they prefer as they near retirement.

Multiport data in the article shows SMSFs had around 43.1% in shares, 26.7% cash and 11.5% fixed interest, with the remainder in property and alternatives—generally a different mix to public default funds and reflecting the preferences of wealthier, self-directed investors.

For the defensive portion of a portfolio, Doug Turek recommends an 'all-weather' split of roughly one-third cash and floating-rate investments, one-third fixed-rate investments, and one-third inflation-linked bonds to balance income, interest-rate sensitivity and inflation protection.

The article relays advice to stick to a pre-determined equity/bond mix and to rebalance after big market moves. That means reviewing your target allocation and selling assets that have run up in value to buy those that have fallen, keeping risk in line with your plan.

Most advisers in the article say SMSFs offer greater flexibility and tax benefits but aren’t generally recommended until you have a minimum of about $300,000 to invest. That threshold reflects the costs and administrative requirements of running an SMSF versus staying in a public super fund.