We have $1.6m in an SMSF. Should we keep it, or move it to a standard fund?

August 19, 2026 — 5:01am

You have reached your maximum number of saved items.

Remove items from your saved list to add more.

My husband and I are wondering whether it is still worthwhile maintaining our self-managed super fund. We currently have about $1.6 million in our SMSF. The fund previously held investment properties, but we have now sold those properties and the fund is invested in financial assets.

We have a financial adviser, but before discussing this with him, I’d like to do some independent research and understand whether an SMSF still makes sense for us. Given the costs involved in running an SMSF, would we potentially be better off transferring our super into a professionally managed industry or retail super fund instead?

At what level of superannuation does an SMSF generally become cost-effective, and are there other advantages of retaining an SMSF that we should consider beyond simply comparing the fees? We are both retired, so the fund is also now at a different stage of its life than when we originally established it. What would you suggest we look at when deciding whether to keep the SMSF or move to a managed super fund?

The conventional thinking is that you should only use a self-managed super fund if you wish to invest in assets that are not readily available through a normal retail or industry super fund.

These may include your own business premises, unlisted property syndicates and, in my own case, listed shares with such a small market capitalisation that the normal managed super funds do not have in their portfolios.

I’m 64. Should I use my super to pay off the rest of my mortgage?

Paul BensonMoney contributor

Given you have sold your investment properties and now have the money invested in normal cash and equity-based assets, I see little purpose in retaining the SMSF simply........

© The Age