Major industry fund urges standardised product labelling

Mike Taylor

Managing Editor and Publisher

22 July 2026

A major industry superannuation fund has taken up the case for the Government to legislate for the standardisation of investment labelling.

While financial advisers have long criticised superannuation funds for their labelling of investment options, big retail sector fund, Rest, has conducted a survey of members and concluded that complex labelling is creating confusion.

However, the call echoes those of more than 15 years’ ago when big research and ratings house, Morningstar, urged regulatory change while singling out funds labelling their offerings as “balanced” when they contained up to 70% growth assets.

The issue has now become more critical given the need for superannuation funds to pass the performance test.

Rest said its survey, conducted by the Redbridge Group, had found that only 37% of members found superannuation and retirement products easy to understand with the overwhelming majority calling for a clearer, plain-language approach.

Rest chief investment officer, Michael Clancy said consistent and standardised investment option and product labels are particularly important in light of ongoing Treasury consultations on improving consumer protections, and changes to strengthen the superannuation performance test.

In doing so, he pointed to the differing investment make-up of so-called “balanced” options.

“An unacceptably high number of our members say they find super and retirement products too complex. We want to help them be confident in their financial future so they can enjoy their best retirement,” Clancy said.

“We believe the inconsistent labels applied to investment options is a significant contributor to this confusion. It can be very difficult for members to make like-for-like comparisons of product features and risk levels.

“Many funds offer an investment option named ‘Balanced’, for example, but there can be a wide disparity in these options’ individual risk and return profiles. One fund’s ‘Balanced’ option can be very different to another fund’s option with the exact same name,” Clancy said.

“This makes it hard for members to make meaningful comparisons and, worse, can inadvertently expose them to a level of risk they may not be comfortable with were they better informed.

“Recent high profile fund collapses have caused significant financial harm, and it is essential that our consumer protection frameworks are fit for purpose. Standard labels could help prevent losses that occur when consumers enter options or products that they don’t understand or are unsuitable for their risk profile.”

Rest’s formal statement said the fund is calling on the Australian Government to work with industry to develop a standardised labelling framework that applies consistent risk categories and descriptors across comparable investment options.

“This builds on the work the Government has already undertaken to develop a product labelling regime for ‘sustainable’ investment products, which Rest has supported,” Clancy said.

“Members could benefit greatly from standardised investment labels that apply consistent definitions for different risk categories like ‘Conservative’, ‘Balanced’ and ‘Growth’,” he said.

“A framework based on standardisation and consistency would improve transparency and allow members to make more meaningful comparisons as well as better- informed decisions.”

He noted that Rest advocated for this proposal in its Pre-Budget Submission 2026-27 and has reiterated the call in its submissions to Treasury on Strengthening the Superannuation Performance Test, Enhancing Member Protections and Sustainable Investment Product Labelling.