🇦🇺Australia

Kapazitätsverlust durch manuelle IPS-Überprüfungsprozesse

4 verified sources

Definition

Australian super funds’ IPS documents, such as those of State Super and ElectricSuper, cover a wide range of topics: investment philosophy, objectives, asset allocation, risk management, liquidity, valuations, responsible investment, tax risk, exposure limits and more.[3][6] APRA’s SPG 530 further expects that Boards approve documented investment objectives and strategies for each investment option and that policies be reviewed and updated over time.[5] In practice, these IPS reviews are often large, cross‑functional projects involving investment, risk, legal, tax, operations and external consultants. Although public documents do not specify hours, logic-based estimation using typical governance project patterns suggests that a triennial IPS and investment governance update for a medium-to-large fund may consume 500–1,500 hours of internal staff time plus external advisory input. Assuming blended internal cost of AUD 150 per hour, this equates to AUD 75,000–225,000 per full review cycle, much of which is spent on manual drafting, version control, chasing approvals and rework rather than on substantive investment analysis.[3][5][6]

Key Findings

  • Financial Impact: Quantified (logic-based): Approx. 500–1,500 internal hours per major IPS review cycle (every 2–3 years), costing roughly AUD 75,000–225,000 per cycle at ~AUD 150/hour blended cost; 50–70% of this (AUD 37,500–157,500) is avoidable coordination and rework effort.
  • Frequency: Triennial for full reviews aligned with actuarial valuations (as indicated in typical pension documentation) plus interim updates when significant investment changes occur.[1][3]
  • Root Cause: Unstructured, document-based IPS content; lack of centralised workflow tools; email-based consultation and approvals; repeated manual reformatting for Board papers, regulators and internal committees; absence of templates aligned with APRA SPG 530 expectations.[1][3][5][6]

Why This Matters

The Pitch: Medium-to-large Australian pension funds in Australia 🇦🇺 waste 1,000–3,000 staff hours per triennial IPS review cycle on manual drafting, version control and approvals. Workflow automation and structured IPS data models can free up 50–70% of this capacity for higher‑value investment work.

Affected Stakeholders

Chief Investment Officer, Head of Investment Governance, Head of Risk, Legal and Compliance teams, Board secretariat / Governance office, External investment consultants

Deep Analysis (Premium)

Financial Impact

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Current Workarounds

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Get Solutions for This Problem

Full report with actionable solutions

$99$39
  • Solutions for this specific pain
  • Solutions for all 15 industry pains
  • Where to find first clients
  • Pricing & launch costs
Get Solutions Report

Methodology & Sources

Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.

Evidence Sources:

Related Business Risks

Verstöße gegen APRA-Investment-Governance-Anforderungen

Quantified (logic-based): Approx. AUD 0.5m–2m per significant APRA investment-governance remediation program over 1–3 years (combination of 3–5 internal FTEs at ~AUD 150k–200k per FTE per year plus AUD 300k–600k in external advisors).

Fehlentscheidungen durch unzureichende IPS-Überprüfung

Quantified (logic-based): Approx. 0.25–0.75% of assets per year in foregone performance or excess risk due to misaligned strategic asset allocation; for a AUD 10bn fund, this is roughly AUD 25m–75m per year.

Sanktionen wegen Verstoß gegen SMSF-Investitionsanforderungen

Quantified (logic-based): Approx. AUD 3,000+ per year in extra tax on AUD 200k non-compliant investments (tax at ~45% instead of 15%) plus typical ATO SMSF administrative penalties of AUD 1,000–4,000 per contravention.

Fehlentscheidungen bei Asset-Allokation durch ungeeignete aktuariellen Annahmen

Estimated opportunity cost of 0.5–1.0% of assets per annum from suboptimal asset allocation in a AUD 100–500 million DB fund, i.e., AUD 0.5–5 million per year, cumulating to AUD 2.5–25 million over 5 years.

ALM Modeling Delays

20-40 hours per quarterly ALM review at AUD 500/hour = AUD 10,000-20,000

Poor ALM Decisions

AUD 25% excess contributions for underfunded plans (e.g., 80% funded requires 125% levered assets)

Request Deep Analysis

🇦🇺 Be first to access this market's intelligence