Super is a concessionally taxed investment vehicle not an investment itself. There is a vast world of assets they could have been holding. I've seen that in the 21 years to 2004 average Term Deposit rates where 6.3%, allow for tax this beats the 5% target he had. Allowing for SMSF fees he would not have had to take much additional risk to target the 5% a year. My point is that its stupid if people complain about super being a bad investment when it is merely a holding structure and the investments within it are what one makes them.
