Calculator
Compare long-term performance between two super options
Projected Wealth Gap
Extra savings at retirement
Over 30 years, the return difference creates a wealth gap of $394,600. Fund 1 is projected to outperform by over 51.8%.
Choosing between superannuation funds or investment options isn't just about fees—it's about the net growth they generate over decades. In the Australian super system, a performance difference of just 1% to 2% per year can lead to a discrepancy of hundreds of thousands of dollars by retirement. While 'past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results', understanding the trajectory of different growth rates is essential for strategic planning. Some Australians prefer 'High Growth' options, which typically invest more in Australian and international shares, while others opt for 'Balanced' or 'Conservative' options that include more bonds and cash. This tool allows you to compare two different growth scenarios side-by-side. By visualizing the 'Wealth Gap' that forms between a high-performing fund and a median one, you can better appreciate the importance of regular fund health checks. Especially with the ATO's annual performance test, staying with a 'failing' or underperforming fund can significantly jeopardize your lifestyle in your post-working years.
Our Super Growth Comparison Tool utilizes the compound interest formula **A = P(1 + r/n)^(nt)** for two distinct datasets simultaneously. **P** represents your current balance, **r** is the annual growth rate (net of fees and tax), and **t** is the number of years until retirement. We assume annual compounding (**n=1**) to match standard industry reporting. The tool calculates the 'Future Value' for Fund A and Fund B, and then derives the **Wealth Gap**—the absolute difference between the two outcomes. To keep the comparison realistic within the Australian context, we provide the option to factor in estimated annual contributions (based on the current 11.5% SG rate). The mathematics highlights the 'Hockey Stick' effect of compounding; for the first 10 years, the difference between two growth rates may seem minor, but in the final 10 years of a 30-year projection, the gap widens exponentially as the interest begins to earn significant interest of its own.
When comparing growth, always use the 'Net of Fees and Tax' figure. A fund might claim a 10% return, but if they charge 2% in fees, your actual growth rate for this calculator is 8%. In Australia, most 'balanced' options aim for a return of CPI + 3% to 4% over the long term.
Many young Australians are defaulted into 'Conservative' or 'Cash' options where the growth rate is barely 2-3%. While this feels 'safe', the comparison tool will show you that over 40 years, this safety could cost you $500,000 or more in lost growth compared to a standard 'High Growth' option.
Higher growth usually comes with higher volatility (more 'red' years). If you have 20+ years until retirement, you can typically afford to ride out the market dips to achieve the higher compounded growth shown in 'Fund A'. If you are 2 years from retirement, the 'Wealth Gap' matters less than capital preservation.
For real data to plug into this comparison, use the official ATO 'YourSuper' comparison tool via MyGov. It provides the 10-year average annual return for every MySuper product in Australia, which is a much better baseline than a single 'lucky' year.
Markets and fund performances change. Set a calendar reminder every two years to re-run this comparison with your updated balance and the fund's latest performance data. It's the most profitable 10 minutes you'll spend all year.
If you find a large gap in growth between two options, look at the 'Asset Allocation' in their PDS. Usually, the higher-performing option has a higher percentage of 'Growth Assets' (Shares and Property) vs 'Defensive Assets' (Cash and Fixed Interest).
Tom stayed in his employer's default fund (6.2% avg return) for 15 years. He compared it to a top-tier industry fund (8.1% avg return) using his $120k balance. The calculator showed a $340,000 difference by age 65. Tom switched the next day and consolidated his three other small accounts.
Sarah, aged 30, was in a 'Conservative' option earning 4%. She used the comparison tool to see the impact of moving to a 'Growth' option (8%). Over 35 years, the 'Wealth Gap' was staggering—over $700k. Seeing the visual chart gave her the confidence to accept more short-term market risk for that long-term reward.
A couple compared two very similar 'Balanced' funds. One returned 7.5% and the other 6.5%. With a combined balance of $400,000, they realized that even this small 1% gap would lead to an extra $180,000 for their joint retirement, enough to fund several years of travel.
Everything you need to know about this topic.
Continue your journey with these related resources.