Australia’s biggest super funds are failing to live up to their stated support for, or commitments to, global climate goals. Of the top 40 funds by assets under management (AUM), most have voiced support for the climate goals of the Paris Agreement or set targets to reduce emissions to net zero by or before 2050. It is abundantly clear that achieving these climate goals leaves no room for expansion of the fossil fuel industry. However, 26 of the 40 funds have failed to publicly disclose any fund-wide divestment or exclusion of coal, oil or gas companies (or plans to do so), leaving them exposed to hordes of companies pursuing new climate-wrecking fossil fuel projects.
While 50% of these funds (by AUM) have divested Australian coal miners Whitehaven Coal and New Hope Corporation from their active holdings, very few have divested from Australian oil and gas giants like Woodside Petroleum and Santos, which are pursuing new climate-wrecking gas projects such as Scarborough, Narrabri, Barossa and Beetaloo. Woodside’s Scarborough-Pluto gas project, for example, could result in the emissions equivalent of 15 coal-fired power stations running for 30 years.
Some super funds that claim to be ‘climate leaders,’ such as HESTA and Aware Super, are falling behind their industry peers like UniSuper, AustralianSuper, and Vision Super, which have substantially divested from polluting oil and gas producers.
By continuing to invest in companies pursuing plans consistent with the failure of the Paris Agreement, funds are falling short of members’ expectations and their stated support for, and commitments to, global climate goals.
Key findings
Of the 40 funds analysed, 26 have failed to publicly disclose any fund-wide divestment or exclusion of coal, oil or gas companies (or plans to do so). These funds received a score of ‘none’ in the table below.
- 14 super funds, representing over $1 trillion in AUM have either substantially divested from, have some form of exclusion on, or have plans to phase out investments in thermal coal mining companies: AustralianSuper, Commonwealth Super Corporation, Aware Super, UniSuper, Rest, HESTA, Cbus, Macquarie, Telstra Super, Vision Super, Active Super, NGS Super, Suncorp, and Media Super.
- 50% of the top 40 super funds by AUM have divested Whitehaven and New Hope, companies pursuing major new coal projects, from their active holdings. The vast majority of these funds exclude investment in Whitehaven and New Hope altogether.
- 5 super funds, representing almost $384 billion in AUM have either substantially divested from, have some form of exclusion on, or have plans to phase out oil and gas producers: AustralianSuper, UniSuper, Vision Super, NGS Super, and Suncorp.
- A further 2 funds have reduced exposure to these companies through publicly-disclosed low carbon approaches, but the specific impact of these policies on oil and gas investments is not disclosed: Aware Super and Cbus.
- 17% of the top 40 super funds by AUM have divested Woodside and Santos, companies pursuing major new oil and gas projects, from their active holdings.
- 28 of the 40 funds have either voiced support for the climate goals of the Paris Agreement or set targets to reduce emissions to net zero by or before 2050.
| wdt_ID | Ranking (AUM) | Fund | Members | Assets Under Management ($\'000) | Assets Under Management | Coal policy | Coal divestment action | Oil & gas policy | Oil & gas divestment action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | AustralianSuper | 2,468,216 | 244,939,807 | 244.9 | None | Partial | None | Minimal |
| 2 | 2 | Commonwealth Super Corp | 675,701 | 244,775,063 | 244.8 | Minimal | Partial | None | None |
| 3 | 3 | Aware Super | 1,123,049 | 153,637,189 | 153.6 | Minimal | Partial | Reduced exposure | Reduced exposure |
| 4 | 4 | QSuper | 618,859 | 136,132,255 | 136.1 | None | None | None | None |
| 5 | 5 | AMP | 1,150,081 | 118,856,219 | 118.9 | None | None | None | None |
| 6 | 6 | MLC (owned by IOOF) | 1,049,985 | 109,709,786 | 109.7 | None | None | None | None |
| 7 | 7 | BT Financial Group | 1,005,020 | 109,237,393 | 109.2 | None | None | None | None |
| 8 | 8 | UniSuper | 497,959 | 102,593,950 | 102.6 | Minimal | Partial | None | Minimal |
| 9 | 9 | Sunsuper | 1,455,593 | 98,938,197 | 98.9 | None | None | None | None |
| 10 | 10 | Colonial First State | 846,980 | 96,914,679 | 96.9 | None | None | None | None |
| 11 | 11 | REST | 1,846,992 | 67,049,092 | 67.0 | Minimal | Partial | None | None |
| 12 | 12 | HESTA | 925,054 | 67,002,788 | 67.0 | Minimal | Partial | None | None |
| 13 | 13 | Cbus | 778,510 | 66,695,369 | 66.7 | Reduced exposure | Reduced exposure | Reduced exposure | Reduced exposure |
| 14 | 14 | HOSTPlus | 1,303,176 | 64,523,103 | 64.5 | None | None | None | None |
| 15 | 15 | OnePath (now owned by IOOF) | 761,840 | 38,236,760 | 38.2 | None | None | None | None |
| 16 | 16 | equipsuper (including Catholic Super) | 148,613 | 33,898,889 | 33.9 | None | None | None | None |
| 17 | 17 | IOOF | 234,418 | 33,895,219 | 33.9 | None | None | None | None |
| 18 | 18 | Mercer | 292,901 | 31,867,421 | 31.9 | None | None | None | None |
| 19 | 19 | Macquarie | 96,988 | 31,129,208 | 31.1 | Future commitment | Reduced exposure | None | None |
| 20 | 20 | Spirit Super (formed after the merger between MTAA Super and Tasplan Super) | 330,756 | 26,630,350 | 26.6 | None | None | None | None |
| 21 | 21 | Telstra Super | 91,288 | 25,121,342 | 25.1 | Minimal | Partial | None | None |
| 22 | 22 | CareSuper | 220,577 | 21,117,725 | 21.1 | None | None | None | None |
| 23 | 23 | Netwealth Super | 69,480 | 17,018,668 | 17.0 | None | None | None | None |
| 24 | 24 | Vision Super | 84,802 | 15,224,275 | 15.2 | Minimal | Partial | Minimal | Minimal |
| 25 | 25 | LGIAsuper (now merged with Energy Super) | 75,561 | 14,768,094 | 14.8 | None | None | None | None |
Methodology
The scope of this analysis covers the top 40 super funds by assets under management (AUM), according to APRA’s June 2021 fund-level superannuation statistics, Table 1 and Table 2. Where mergers between super funds have occurred since June 2021, the single merged entity is listed on the table (noting the previous fund name/s) and occupies only one position on the table, unless the merged funds remain as standalone brands with standalone policies.
The classification system below was devised to describe and differentiate the superannuation industry’s progress with respect to fund-wide fossil fuel policy and divestment activity. The fund-wide coal and oil & gas policies and divestment activity of each fund were sourced from publicly-available policy documents, webpages, reports, blog posts, media releases and media reports. Every fund analysed in this study was contacted prior to publication and provided with the opportunity to present any further relevant, publicly-disclosed information not already captured.
Based on this information, each fund was classified based on the system below. Details regarding each funds’ policy and divestment activity can be found here. All information presented in this table is accurate as of 1 January 2022.
Coal policy classification
| wdt_ID | Category | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Comprehensive | This super fund excludes investments in all companies that are either expanding the scale of the coal sector, and/or relying on scenarios consistent with the failure of the Paris Agreement to justify their future coal business prospects. No investments in companies like Whitehaven Coal, New Hope, AGL, Origin Energy, BHP, or South32. |
| 2 | Partial | This super fund excludes investments in companies deriving 33% or more revenue from coal mining and coal power generation in both active and passive holdings. No investments in companies like Whitehaven Coal, New Hope, AGL, or Origin Energy. |
| 3 | Minimal | This super fund excludes investments in companies deriving 75% or more revenue from coal mining only in both active and passive holdings. No investments in companies like Whitehaven Coal or New Hope. |
| 4 | Reduced exposure | This super fund has publicly disclosed details of a policy (such as low carbon benchmarking or stranded asset risk weighting) that reduces exposure to some companies deriving revenue from coal operations. |
| 5 | Future commitment | This super fund has failed to set a coal revenue threshold, but instead intends to phase out thermal coal exposure by or before 2030. By this time it will have no investments in companies like Whitehaven Coal or New Hope. |
| 6 | None | No policy found. |
Coal divestment classification
| wdt_ID | Category | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Comprehensive | The fund has disclosed (or the fund’s policy makes it clear) it has divested from all companies that are either expanding the scale of the coal sector, and/or relying on scenarios consistent with the failure of the Paris Agreement to justify their future coal business prospects. |
| 2 | Partial | The fund has disclosed (or the fund’s policy makes it clear) that it has divested from some companies deriving revenue from coal mining, transport, or coal power generation, from both active and passive holdings. |
| 3 | Minimal | The fund has disclosed (or the fund’s policy makes it clear) that it has divested from some companies deriving revenue from coal mining, transport, or coal power generation, from active holdings only. |
| 4 | Reduced exposure | The fund has disclosed (or the fund’s policy makes it clear) that it has reduced exposure to some companies deriving revenue from coal operations. |
| 5 | Future commitment | The fund has disclosed (or the fund’s policy makes it clear) that it will phase out thermal coal exposure by or before 2030. |
| 6 | None | No public divestment comfirmation found. |
Oil & gas policy classification
| wdt_ID | Category | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Comprehensive | This super fund excludes investments in all companies that are either expanding the scale of the oil and gas sector, and/or relying on scenarios consistent with the failure of the Paris Agreement to justify their future oil and gas business prospects. No investments in companies like Woodside, Santos, Origin Energy, BHP, Beach Energy, Senex Energy, Carnarvon Petroleum, Karoon Energy, Cooper Energy, or FAR. |
| 2 | Partial | This super fund excludes investments in companies deriving 50% or more revenue from oil and gas production in both active and passive holdings. No investments in companies like Woodside, Santos, Beach Energy, Senex Energy, Carnarvon Petroleum, Karoon Energy, Cooper Energy, or FAR. |
| 3 | Minimal | This super fund excludes investments in companies deriving 50% or more revenue from oil and gas production in active holdings only. No investments in companies like Woodside, Santos, Beach Energy, Senex Energy, Carnarvon Petroleum, Karoon Energy, Cooper Energy, or FAR. |
| 4 | Reduced exposure | This super fund has publicly disclosed details of a policy (such as low carbon benchmarking or stranded asset risk weighting) that reduces exposure to some companies deriving revenue from oil and gas production. |
| 5 | Future commitment | This super fund has failed to set an oil and gas revenue threshold, but instead intends to phase out oil and gas exposure by or before 2040. By this time it will have no investments in companies like Woodside, Santos, Origin Energy, BHP, Beach Energy, Senex Energy, Carnarvon Petroleum, Karoon Energy, Cooper Energy, or FAR. |
| 6 | None | No policy found. |
Oil & gas divestment classification
| wdt_ID | Category | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Comprehensive | The fund has disclosed (or the fund’s policy makes it clear) that it has divested from all companies that are either expanding the scale of the oil and gas sector, and/or relying on scenarios consistent with the failure of the Paris Agreement to justify their future oil and gas business prospects. |
| 2 | Partial | The fund has disclosed (or the fund’s policy makes it clear) that it has divested from some companies deriving revenue from oil and gas production, from both active and passive holdings. |
| 3 | Minimal | The fund has disclosed (or the fund’s policy makes it clear) that it has divested from some companies deriving revenue from oil and gas production, from active holdings only. |
| 4 | Reduced exposure | The fund has disclosed (or the fund’s policy makes it clear) that it has reduced exposure to some companies deriving revenue from oil and gas production. |
| 5 | Future commitment | The fund has disclosed (or the fund’s policy makes it clear) that it will phase out oil and gas exposure by or before 2040. |
| 6 | None | No public divestment confirmation found. |
For the details on how each fund was classified, click here
New analysis shows big super funds (such as @HESTASuper and @AwareSuper) are undermining global climate goals by continuing to invest in #climate-wrecking companies. Find out how your super fund stacks up & take action today:https://t.co/YkTLlRW9UM pic.twitter.com/2ydMYsjxdf
— Market Forces (@market_forces) February 14, 2022
Despite some big funds shifting members’ money away from fossil fuels in 2021, many of the super funds analysed in this study are still investing in coal producers pursuing massive expansion projects, while divestment from oil and gas companies (expanding in the same manner) is not happening at the scale nor pace required to achieve global climate goals.
Of the 40 funds analysed, only 14 have either substantially divested from, have some form of exclusion on, or have plans to phase out investments in thermal coal mining companies. Even worse, only five funds have done the same for oil and gas producers.
Some big industry funds claiming to be at the front of the pack are fast falling behind. Aware Super says thermal coal divestment is “bold action on climate change” and HESTA pats itself on the back for being “the first major super fund to… implement restrictions on investment in thermal coal.” However, by failing to dump oil and gas investments, these two self-appointed ‘climate leaders’ are lagging behind their peers. Several other big industry funds—such as UniSuper, AustralianSuper and Vision Super—have substantially shifted members’ money out of dirty oil and gas producers, while HESTA, Aware and other big super funds remain invested.
The science is clear: if we are to have a chance of limiting global warming in line with the climate goals of the Paris Agreement or net-zero by 2050, there is no room for new fossil fuel projects, including the polluting new gas plans being pursued by the likes of Woodside and Santos.
The climate-wrecking companies super funds must ditch
Many of the funds in our analysis remain invested in companies pursuing plans consistent with the failure of the Paris Agreement because they are either expanding the scale of the fossil fuel sector, and/or relying on scenarios consistent with the failure of the Paris Agreement to justify their future business prospects. Super funds often claim that engaging with these ‘out of line’ companies in order to clean them up is their preferred climate strategy, yet this engagement has demonstrably failed to bring these companies into line with the Paris climate goals.
Below are examples of the worst ‘out of line’ companies super funds must divest from, as these companies either cannot (or will not) align with the climate goals of the Paris Agreement.
Oil and gas producers
Woodside Petroleum
Australia’s largest producer of climate-wrecking gas, Woodside, has recently agreed to take over BHP’s entire petroleum business. This would roughly double Woodside’s oil and gas production capacity and make it a global top 10 independent oil and gas company. At the same time, the company wants to develop one of the most polluting projects Australia has ever seen: the massive Scarborough gas field off the coast of Western Australia and its associated LNG processing facility, Pluto 2.
Woodside’s proposed Scarborough gas and Pluto LNG project would result in the emissions equivalent of 15 coal-fired power stations running for 30 years, threaten to accelerate degradation of the Murujuga Rock art (proposed for World Heritage listing) due to industrial emissions, and would also cause significant impacts to the local marine environment. Independent analysis has concluded the Scarborough-Pluto combined project “…represents a bet against the world implementing the Paris Agreement”.
Gas flaring at Woodside’s Pluto LNG processing facility.
Image courtesy of the Conservation Council of Western Australia (CCWA)
SANTOS
Community members voicing opposition to the Narrabri gas project in NSW, 2014.
Image courtesy of the Lock the Gate Alliance
Santos—another major oil and gas producer—has recently undergone a merger with Oil Search to make the combined business one of the 20 largest companies on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX). This new fossil fuel giant has one main aim: produce more oil and gas. In fact, Santos is pursuing major new projects that would increase production by a third from 2020 to 2025.
Santos is pushing ahead with its toxic Narrabri gas project, despite years of opposition from local Gomeroi Traditional Owners and farmers, as well as former chief scientist Penny Sackett, who has confirmed the project is inconsistent with the Paris climate goals. Another of the company’s major development projects, Barossa LNG, is so dirty it has been labelled “a carbon-dioxide emissions factory, with an LNG by-product” by industrial economist John Robert.
Thermal coal producers
WHITEHAVEN COAL
Whitehaven Coal is the biggest undiversified coal mining company on the Australian share market, and its plans to massively expand the coal industry are completely at odds with the climate goals of the Paris Agreement. To justify its business plans, Whitehaven refers to coal demand scenarios consistent with a catastrophic 3ºC of global warming.
Whitehaven is planning to spend around $2 billion on three new coal mines and expansions: Vickery, Narrabri Stage 3 and Winchester South. These mines have marketable coal reserves of almost 500 million tonnes. When emissions from digging up and burning the coal are added, over their lifetimes these three mines would unleash almost 1.1 billion tonnes of carbon emissions, the equivalent of almost twice Australia’s annual emissions.
Whitehaven’s monstrous Maules Creek coal mine has destroyed swathes of the Leard State Forest, NSW.
Image courtesy of the Lock the Gate Alliance
NEW HOPE CORPORATION
The New Acland coal mine in the Darling Downs, Qld.
Image courtesy of the Lock the Gate Alliance
New Hope is another big undiversified Australian coal mining company. It is currently planning a 12 year expansion of its New Acland coal mine (New Acland Stage 3), a project totally inconsistent with achieving net zero emissions by 2050 and the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5ºC. Worse still, this project would encroach on some of Queensland’s best farming land.
Much like Whitehaven’s Maules Creek mine, the New Acland Stage 3 expansion is one of the most contested coal mining projects in Australian history. The mine is situated in Queensland’s fertile Darling Downs, on and around land considered as among the best 1.5% of agricultural land in Queensland. New Hope’s Stage 3 expansion would dig three vast new coal pits, destroying land that has sustained generations of dairy and cattle farmers.
Further information
What are ‘active’ and ‘passive’ holdings?
Active holdings refers to investments directly held by an investor—such as a super fund—in a company or companies, or investments managed by an external party that actively chooses the makeup of the investment portfolio according to the agreement (or ‘mandate’) it has with the underlying investor (such as a super fund). Passive holdings refer to investments not directly held by an investor, but instead held or managed by another party, which does not actively choose the makeup of the portfolio, and instead invests in an index of stocks such as the ASX200. Passive investments can be manipulated to reduce investment in or exclude particular companies or types of companies.
Super funds classification detail
ACSRF
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Active Super (formerly Local Government Super)
Coal policy
Active Super’s ESG policy states that it does not “…contribute funds to companies who achieve more than a third of their earnings from carbon-intensive activities, like coal mining, oil tar sands and coal-fired electricity generation.”
Coal divestment action
Active Super’s policy is portfolio wide, meaning that it covers both active and passive holdings. This excludes thermal coal producers Whitehaven Coal and New Hope, as well as gentailers AGL Energy and Origin Energy.
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
AMP
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
AustralianSuper
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
AustralianSuper announced in November 2020 that it had divested from Whitehaven Coal, and all active exposure to thermal coal companies. The fund’s list of investment holdings doesn’t appear to contain any thermal coal mining companies, including Whitehaven and New Hope. However, AustralianSuper continues to invest in companies that generate revenue from coal-fired power, including AGL Energy and Origin Energy.
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
According to the fund’s list of investment holdings, AustralianSuper has minimal exposure to pure play oil and gas producers (such as Woodside Petroleum and Santos), indicating these companies have been removed from the fund’s active holdings.
Aware Super
Coal policy
Aware Super excludes “…Direct investments in companies that generate 10% or more of their revenues generated directly from mining thermal or energy coal.”
Coal divestment action
Aware Super announced in July 2020 that it was in the process of divesting from companies deriving more than 10% of their revenue from mining thermal coal (including Whitehaven Coal and New Hope) and that, as of October 2020, that divestment had occurred.
Oil & gas policy
Aware Super has no policy to formally exclude oil and gas investments, but the fund has adopted low carbon benchmarks for listed equities, which are likley to have resulted in some reduction in exposure to emissions intensive sectors. Actual impact on oil and gas investments is likely to be limited to scope 1 & 2 emisisons, as there is no disclosure to suggest scope 3 emissions are accounted for in these benchmarks. Aware Super’s benchmarks briefly refer to fossil fuel reserves: “…these custom benchmarks exclude, or have a reduced weighting to, the most carbon intensive companies from the respective benchmarks based on emissions and fossil fuel reserves data.” However, there is no further disclosure to determine how reserves are factored in, and therefore no disclosure of the impact on oil and gas investments.
Oil & gas divestment action
Some reduction in exposure as per the fund’s policy commitments.
BT Financial Group
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
CareSuper
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Cbus
Coal policy
Cbus’ stranded asset framework considers carbon intensity, and states “A penalty weighting is applied to companies that have high operational and product climate risk, whilst companies with exposure to asset stranding are constrained to zero weight”. Applies to 20.5% of equities. This will have caused some reduction in investments in coal companies (see pg 15 MSCI Methodology for more information).
Coal divestment action
Cbus’s stranded asset framework will have caused some reduction in investments in coal companies but the size of this reduction is not disclosed.
Oil & gas policy
Cbus’ stranded asset framework considers carbon intensity, and states “A penalty weighting is applied to companies that have high operational and product climate risk, whilst companies with exposure to asset stranding are constrained to zero weight”. Applies to 20.5% of equities. This will have caused some reduction in investments in oil and gas companies (see pg 15 MSCI Methodology for more information).
Oil & gas divestment action
Policy will have caused some reduction in investments in oil and gas companies, but specific impact not disclosed.
Colonial First State
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
CommBank Group Super
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Commonwealth Super Corp
Coal policy
CSC excludes investment in “…undiversified companies that derive 70% or more of their revenue from thermal coal production/extraction.”
Coal divestment action
CSC’s thermal coal policy is portfolio wide, meaning that it covers both active and passive holdings. This excludes Whitehaven Coal and New Hope. This divestment activity received media coverage in March 2021.
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Energy Super (now merged with LGIA Super)
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
equipsuper (including Catholic Super)
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
HESTA
Coal policy
HESTA announced in 2014 that it would make no new investments in companies that generate more than 15% of their revenue from the exploration, production or transportation of thermal coal. In June 2020, the fund fully divested from companies meeting this threshold.
Coal divestment action
HESTA’s policy announcement in June 2020 is portfolio wide, meaning that it covers both active and passive holdings. It excluded Whitehaven Coal and New Hope.
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
HOSTPlus
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
HUB24
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
IOOF
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
LGIAsuper (now merged with Energy Super)
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
LUCRF
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Macquarie
Coal policy
Macquarie states: “we have reduced our limited remaining equity and lending exposures to the coal sector, which are expected to run off by 2024.”
Coal divestment action
Macquarie’s coal policy will have caused some reduction in investments in coal companies but the size of this reduction is not disclosed.
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Media Super
Coal policy
Media Super made the decision to “…divest from the mining of thermal coal in our listed equities mandates” in July 2019.
Coal divestment action
Media Super’s thermal coal exclusion policy is portfolio wide, meaning that it covers both active and passive holdings. This rules out investment in Whitehaven Coal and New Hope.
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Mercer
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Mine Super
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
MLC (owned by IOOF)
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Netwealth Super
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
NGS Super
Coal policy
NGS Super’s Responsible Investment Policy states “The Trustee places specific ESG conditions on the Fund’s investment mandates to… restrict any holding with companies that generate more than 30% of their revenue from the distribution, power generation, or extraction of thermal coal.”
Coal divestment action
NGS’ holdings disclosure shows it has no investments in thermal coal mining companies like Whitehaven Coal and New Hope. However, the fund still appears to be exposed to companies producing coal-fired power like AGL Energy and Origin Energy.
Oil & gas policy
NGS’ TCFD Report states: “Based on the transitional risks associated with fossil fuel exposure, in the next year we plan to develop a transition plan to divest fossil fuels from our investment portfolio.” This is in addition to the fund having already committed to a carbon neutral investment portfolio by 2030.
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
OnePath (now owned by IOOF)
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
PostSuper
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Qantas Super
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
QSuper
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
REST
Coal policy
Rest states: “By 31 December 2021, we intend to divest from all listed companies that derive more than 10 per cent of their revenue from thermal coal mining – unless the company has a credible net zero by 2050 plan or science-based targets.”
Coal divestment action
Rest’s policy is portfolio wide, meaning that it covers both active and passive holdings. It has excluded Whitehaven Coal and New Hope.
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Russell Investments
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Spirit Super (formed after the merger between MTAA Super and Tasplan Super)
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Statewide Super
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Suncorp
Coal policy
In 2019, Suncorp said it “…will no longer invest in, finance or insure new thermal coal mines and power plants, and will not underwrite any existing thermal coal projects after 2025.” Suncorp also has a target to “…phase out existing thermal coal exposures by 2025.”
Coal divestment action
See explanation for Suncorp’s coal exclusion policy.
Oil & gas policy
In 2020, Suncorp strengthened its Fossil Fuels Sensitive Sector Guideline so that it “…will not directly invest in, finance or underwrite… new oil and gas exploration or production.” Suncorp states it will also “…phase out of directly investing in oil and gas by 2040” through a stepped policy framework.
Oil & gas divestment action
See explanation for Suncorp’s oil & gas exclusion policy.
Sunsuper
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
Telstra Super
Coal policy
In June 2021, Telstra Super divested from and excluded all “prime-focus” thermal coal producers from its listed equities portfolios.The fund also states it has plans to “…divest from pure-play thermal coal producers” on a timeline of 2021/2022.
Coal divestment action
Telstra Super divested from and excluded all “prime-focus” thermal coal producers from its listed equities portfolios in June 2021, which includes both acitve and passive holdings. This excludes Whitehaven Coal and New Hope.
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
TWU Super
Coal policy
N/A
Coal divestment action
N/A
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
N/A
UniSuper
Coal policy
UniSuper excludes “…companies that generate greater than 10% of their revenues from thermal coal mining.”
Coal divestment action
UniSuper’s policy is portfolio wide, meaning that it covers both active and passive holdings. This means it excludes Whitehaven Coal and New Hope, which the fund dropped in August 2020.
Oil & gas policy
N/A
Oil & gas divestment action
Analysis of UniSuper’s 2021 Climate Risk and Our Investments report shows that Woodside Petroleum and Oil Search have dropped out of UniSuper’s list of ‘portfolio companies’, meaning they’re no longer in the fund’s top 50 Australian holdings, and exposure to these companies appears to only be through passive investments.
Vision Super
Coal policy
Vision Super announced in November 2018 that it would be divesting from companies that generate more than 25% of revenue from the mining of thermal coal.
Coal divestment action
Vision Super’s policy is portfolio wide, meaning that it covers both active and passive holdings. This excludes Whitehaven Coal and New Hope, as per the fund’s divestment list.
Oil & gas policy
Vision Super released an updated ESG policy in June 2021, restated in December 2021, which notes partial divestment from oil and gas companies. The policy states “Vision Super will not invest in companies that derive material revenue from oil and/or gas extraction where such investments are directly held,” meaning that the policy applies only to the fund’s active holdings (as opposed to its passive holdings).
Oil & gas divestment action
Vision Super’s 2021 ESG policy has excluded oil and gas producers Woodside and Santos from the fund’s active holdings, according to the fund’s divestment list.
Disclaimer
The information provided by Market Forces does not constitute financial advice. The information is presented in order to inform people motivated by environmental concerns and take actions based on those concerns. Market Forces is organising data for environmental ends.
The information and actions provided by Market Forces do not account for any individual’s personal objectives, financial situation or needs. It should not be used, relied upon, or treated as a substitute for specific professional advice.
Market Forces recommends all users obtain their own independent professional advice before making any decision relating to their particular requirements or circumstances. Switching super funds may have unintended financial consequences.
For more information about Market Forces, please visit the about page of the site. To see how we profile super funds go to the methodology page.