🌱 Who Owns Australian Super
“Ethical investing” and “responsible super” are aggressively marketed concepts in Australian financial services. They are also among the least regulated in terms of what those labels actually require. ASIC has begun enforcement action — but greenwashing remains widespread.
as of 2024
for greenwashing
vs industry funds (avg)
Understanding the Fund Landscape
Not-for-profit funds run for the benefit of members. Originally established by trade unions and employer groups for specific industries. No external shareholders.
Largest super fund in Australia. Industry fund — member-owned. Originally for construction and building industry workers, now open to all.
Formed from merger of Sunsuper and QSuper in 2022. Queensland-rooted. Industry fund.
Originally First State Super (NSW public servants). ESG-focused claims — check actual holdings in disclosures.
Health and community services workers. Strong ESG stance — verify holdings.
Hospitality, tourism, recreation, sport industry fund.
Retail and fast food workers. One of Australia's largest industry funds.
Operated by banks and financial services companies to make a profit. Members' returns compete with shareholder returns. Fees are typically higher than industry funds.
Westpac-owned. Profit flows to Westpac shareholders.
CBA-owned wealth management. Profit to CBA shareholders.
NAB divested MLC in 2021 — now owned by IOOF/Insignia Financial (ASX). Profits to shareholders.
ASX-listed (AMP). Has faced significant governance controversies. Profit to shareholders.
Owned by Marsh McLennan (NYSE: MMC). ASIC sued Mercer in 2024 over greenwashing claims.
Funds that market themselves on environmental, social and governance (ESG) grounds. Quality varies enormously. ASIC has begun enforcement action on greenwashing.
Oldest dedicated ethical super fund in Australia. Genuinely screened investment process with published criteria. Worth examining as a positive benchmark.
Marketed as Australia's first fossil-free fund. Verify current holdings in annual disclosures.
Now merged with Future Super. Animal welfare and fossil fuel screens.
Women-focused fund. ESG claims — verify holdings against screens.
Greenwashing — Documented Cases
These are not opinions. These are documented regulatory actions and verified industry practices.
Mercer Super — Sustainable Plus Options
ASIC action 2024ASIC sued Mercer Superannuation in March 2024 alleging seven investment options were marketed as excluding companies involved in fossil fuels and other harmful activities — while the funds held shares in companies involved in coal mining, oil and gas extraction, and alcohol production. This is the clearest documented greenwashing case in Australian super.
Various 'ESG' options across retail funds
ASIC guidance 2023ASIC's INFO 271 (March 2023) warned against misleading ESG claims. Common issues: funds calling options 'sustainable' while using broad negative screens with significant carve-outs; applying screens only to direct holdings while indexed/pooled investments remain unscreened; vague language ('considers ESG factors') without defining what that means in practice.
The 'transition' carve-out problem
Industry practiceMany 'ethical' screens include a 'transition' exception — companies involved in fossil fuels are included if they have a transition plan. The quality of what constitutes a 'transition plan' varies enormously and is self-assessed by fund managers. Santos and Woodside have appeared in funds marketed as excluding fossil fuels.
How to Actually Check an Ethical Claim
The PDS must disclose investment screens and exclusions. If it uses language like 'considers ESG factors' without specifics — that's a red flag.
Funds must publish holdings in their annual report or on their website. Search for fossil fuel companies, weapons manufacturers, or whatever matters to you. The holdings don't lie.
APRA's YourSuper comparison tool (moneysmart.gov.au/super) lets you compare fees and returns across funds. Independent data, no spin.
'Invests in sustainable companies' is marketing. 'Excludes companies that derive more than 10% of revenue from thermal coal' is a screen. Only the latter is verifiable.
Sources & References
- ASIC v Mercer Superannuation (Australia) Ltd: Federal Court proceedings, filed March 2024
- ASIC Information Sheet 271 — How to avoid greenwashing when offering or promoting sustainability-related products, March 2023
- APRA Quarterly Superannuation Statistics, 2024
- Market Forces: Super Fund Fossil Fuel Comparison, 2023 — marketforces.org.au
- Australian Ethical investment screens: published on australianethical.com.au
- Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA): asfa.asn.au
- APRA YourSuper comparison tool: moneysmart.gov.au