Understanding the Comfortable Retirement Standard
ASFA’s Comfortable Retirement Standard, released last month, serves as a useful checkpoint for Australians planning their retirement. In a system that relies heavily on balances and benchmarks, it provides a practical reference point for what a ‘comfortable’ retirement might cost in today’s dollars, based on real spending patterns.
According to the standard, the annual cost of a comfortable retirement for homeowners is estimated at $54,840 for singles and $77,375 for couples. For couples, the suggested ‘lump sum’ required to fund this lifestyle has increased to $730,000. While this is a helpful reference, there is a significant issue with benchmarks like this: if we frame retirement success primarily as hitting a specific balance, we risk leaving Australians feeling anxious, overly cautious, and under-supported during one of the most important financial transitions of their lives.
The Core Issue: Will My Income Last?
The problem lies in the question of ‘how big is big enough?’ This framing misses the most critical aspect of retirement for Australians: will my income last as long as I do? The reality is that the superannuation industry is not doing enough to allow Australians to confidently answer this question with a ‘YES.’
In retirement, two main financial risks dominate retirees’ concerns: longevity risk, the risk of outliving their savings, and sequencing risk, where market downturns early in retirement can permanently reduce how long their savings last.
The Impact of Financial Anxiety
When retirees feel these risks are not being actively managed, predictable behaviors follow: they underspend ‘just in case,’ hold unnecessary cash buffers, and experience anxiety for years. Research supports these fears, showing that only half of the Australian population feels financially confident about their retirement, with lower confidence levels among certain groups, including women.
This brings us to an ironic situation: ASFA’s release coincided with the Federal Government’s Best Practice Principles for Superannuation Retirement Income Solutions. These principles address the core purpose of superannuation—not just accumulating savings, but converting them into income that people can rely on for life.
Existing Solutions and Their Benefits
The good news is that a blueprint already exists to achieve this goal. New types of solutions combine the flexibility of account-based pensions with longevity protection, offering a base level of income for life while still allowing exposure to market growth. These solutions also integrate with the age pension, which many Australians still depend on, and are supported by new forms of low-cost digital financial advice.
Under illustrative modeling using this approach, a retired couple could target an income around ASFA’s comfortable level ($77,375 a year) with a starting balance of around $530,000—significantly lower than the balance ASFA calculates. However, the critical difference is not just the number; it’s the confidence that an income stream will continue, regardless of how long they live.
Enhancing Financial Confidence
These structures also reduce the need for large precautionary cash buffers, provide stability through market cycles, and help manage sequencing risk to support long-term strategies rather than reactive decision-making. The result is financial confidence: confidence to spend, plan, and actually enjoy retirement, especially in the early, active years.
Despite years of urging from the government and regulators, progress in developing lifetime income solutions, along with new forms of digital advice, has been slow. Super funds should not be surprised that more members are moving savings to alternate investment platforms or setting up SMSFs. Many still only offer a little more than a traditional account-based pension and limited guidance and advice.
A Call for Change
ASFA’s benchmark is a worthy talking point, but if the industry continues to treat retirement as an accumulation contest, we will keep producing retirees who feel compelled to underspend. The government’s principles set a clear expectation. Trustees must stop hiding behind benchmarks and start being judged on the outcomes retirees truly require: sustainable income, through good markets and bad, for as long as they live. Anything less is failing the purpose of super.
Discussion about this post