The Fine Print Australia · PUBLISHED 24 JUN 2026 · VERIFIED 24 JUN 2026 · AU EDITION

$151K Less: The Women Super Gap in Australia Explained

▶

An Australian woman on the median wage is on track to retire with about $393,676 in super – roughly $151,000 less than what ASFA says a single person needs for a “comfortable” retirement.

The number that matters

25% — On average, working women in Australia retire with a quarter less super than men, meaning they start retirement roughly $150,000 behind a typical comfortable target of around $600,000.

How it quietly costs you

Mechanism: Lower lifetime earnings + unpaid super + time out of the workforce = structurally smaller balances.

1. Gender pay gap compounds into a super gap

• Recent Australian gender pay gap estimates put the gender pay gap in total remuneration at around 21.1%, meaning women, on average, earn around one-fifth less than men for total pay (including bonuses and overtime).
• Lower pay means smaller Super Guarantee (SG) contributions every single year, because compulsory SG is a percentage of ordinary time earnings (currently 11.5% in 2024–25, legislated to rise to 12%).
• Over a 40‑year working life, research cited in Australian reporting shows women earn around $1 million less than men on average, dramatically reducing the base on which SG is calculated.

2. Time out of the workforce for unpaid care

• Women are more likely to take time out of the paid workforce to care for children and family members, which reduces years of SG contributions altogether.
• A major superannuation analysis notes this is a key contributor to women retiring with around 25% less super than men.

3. Unpaid super (SG non‑compliance) hits women harder

• In 2022–23, one in four women (1.5 million) across Australia had unpaid super owed to them, missing out on a total of $1.9 billion in Super Guarantee contributions.
• Over the last 10 years, working women have missed out on $15.5 billion in unpaid super.
• The average affected woman missed out on $1,300 of super in a year, which modelling shows can mean more than $26,000 less in retirement savings for a typical worker by retirement.
• Younger and lower‑paid women are hit hardest: 31% of women aged 20–29 and 29% of women aged 30–39 had unpaid super in 2022–23, and half of women in their 20s and 30s earning under $25,000 missed some or all of the super they were legally owed.

4. Old vs better: typical balance vs “comfortable” benchmark

• ASFA’s Retirement Standard suggests a single person needs about $595,000 in super for a “comfortable” retirement, while a couple needs about $690,000 (2024 estimates).
• Women on the median wage are projected to accumulate about $393,676 in super — roughly $201,000 below that $595,000 comfortable benchmark, and around $151,000 below another “comfortable” line reported in the same analysis.
• Put differently: three in four Australians retire with less than $500,000 in super, and women are “closer to $340,000–$400,000” while men are around $450,000–$500,000.

Impact in dollars

• A 25% super gap on a “comfortable” target of around $600,000 is roughly $150,000 less in retirement savings for women.
• Each year an affected woman misses $1,300 of SG, she loses about $26,000 by retirement due to compounding — nearly an extra year of comfortable living expenses for many retirees.

The second, compounding trap

Mechanism: Women’s lower balances, longer lifespans, and conservative investment settings quietly tax their super twice: less going in, and lower growth on what’s there.

1. Longer time in retirement = savings must last longer

• Women, on average, live longer than men, which means their super has to fund more years of retirement income.
• A retirement-planning discussion for women stresses that women often need their money to last 30–40 years in retirement, not just 20–25.
• With a smaller starting balance and more years to fund, the withdrawal rate has to be lower, or the risk of running out of money increases sharply.

2. More conservative portfolios reduce long‑run growth

• Practitioners who specialise in women’s retirement planning highlight that women are often encouraged (or scared) into overly defensive or conservative super investment options, especially after market volatility.
• Historical data show that during the Global Financial Crisis, a high‑growth portfolio could fall by about 45% in a year, leading many to shift to cash or conservative settings.
• The problem: over decades, a balanced or conservative option might earn, for example, 2–3 percentage points less per year than a growth option.

3. Quantified long‑run cost of being “too safe”

• Using the Reddit scenario as a proxy for compounding, an 8% annual return can roughly double money every nine years, turning $150,000 into about $1.2 million by age 60.
• If a similar portfolio instead earned 5% real (3 percentage points less), that starting $150,000 would grow to roughly $647,000 over 27 years (illustrative), meaning a potential gap of over $500,000 from investment choice alone.
• For a woman who already starts 25% behind on contributions, this lower growth can lock in the gap, making it effectively impossible to catch up without major extra contributions.

4. Impact in dollars

• Combining lower balances (Problem 1) with lower growth (Problem 2) means many women end up hundreds of thousands of dollars short.
• A woman projected to have $393,676 at retirement (median wage) in a conservative setting could realistically be $150,000–$250,000 behind a comparable woman who kept a growth setting and/or had uninterrupted contributions (illustrative based on growth vs conservative compounding and the $150k retirement gap figure).

What this looks like in practice

Persona: “Sarah”

• Name: Sarah
• Age: 37
• Job: Marketing manager in Sydney
• Income: $85,000 gross salary (close to a professional female income level; income used for modelling)
• Super fund type: MySuper balanced option in a large retail fund
• Current super balance: $120,000 (consistent with being behind ideal balances for her age)
• Years to retirement: 30 years (planning to retire at 67)
• History: Took 3 years out of the workforce for two kids (part‑time plus unpaid leave), and had one employer who “forgot” to pay super for 18 months.

Discovery 1 — Unpaid super from a past employer

• Sarah uses recent reporting and learns that in 2022–23, 1 in 4 women had unpaid super, missing out on an average of $1,300 each.
• She checks her ATO online account and confirms one past employer didn’t pay super for about 18 months, worth around $1,500 in SG contributions.
• Using the same modelling as the “Mind the Gap” report, each $1,300 of missed super can mean $26,000 less by retirement.
• For Sarah, her missing $1,500 today could equate to roughly $30,000 less in retirement (assuming similar compounding).
• Comparison: She was told by the employer “it will be sorted” and assumed it was only a few hundred dollars; in reality, it’s tens of thousands of future dollars.

Discovery 2 — Her projected balance vs “comfortable”

• Based on her current balance ($120,000 at 37) and continuing with no extra contributions and a “balanced” return, she’s tracking to something like $400,000 at 67 (illustrative, similar to the $393,676 projection for women on median wages).
• The ASFA Retirement Standard says a single person needs about $595,000 in super for a comfortable retirement.
• That’s a gap of roughly $195,000 for Sarah vs the benchmark.
• Comparison: Her fund’s calculator originally showed she was “on track” for a “modest” retirement (ASFA modest requires only around $100,000 for a single), but she realises “modest” is a much lower standard of living than “comfortable”.

Discovery 3 — Her investment option is too conservative for her age

• Sarah discovers her MySuper default has gradually de‑risked her portfolio; she’s now in a balanced/conservative mix that might realistically earn 2–3 percentage points less per year than a growth option over the long term.
• If she stayed this way, her projected $400,000 would remain roughly that; if instead she averaged something closer to a growth‑style return (illustrative 8% vs 5% real), the same contributions could grow to around $650,000–$700,000 over 30 years.
• That’s an extra $250,000–$300,000 of retirement savings just from investment choice and time, bringing her much closer to, or even above, the $595,000 comfortable benchmark.
• Comparison: She believed “growth is risky gambling” and that a conservative setting was safer; in reality, the bigger long‑term risk for her was running out of money because growth was too low.

The full cost of doing nothing

Using Sarah’s case as a model:

• Baseline (status quo):

• Current path: $120,000 at 37, conservative/balanced setting, no catch‑up contributions, with three years out of the workforce and $1,500 unpaid SG.

• Projected retirement balance: about $400,000 at 67 (similar to median‑wage women’s projection of $393,676).

• Optimised (fixing Problem 1 + Problem 2):

• Recover unpaid super: $1,500 now, which modelling suggests could add around $30,000 by retirement.

• Switch to a growth‑appropriate option (e.g., around 2–3 percentage points higher gross return over 30 years), which could move her projected balance from $400,000 to roughly $650,000–$700,000 (illustrative, consistent with growth vs conservative compounding and the Reddit doubling example).

• Optional: modest salary sacrifice (e.g., $50 per week, or $2,600 per year) would add tens of thousands more, but even without this, investment change + recovered SG is substantial.

Headline combined impact (illustrative model):

• Approximate lifetime gap if she does nothing: about $195,000 below the $595,000 “comfortable” target.
• Approximate gain if she acts on both problems:
• Investment mix uplift: ~$250,000–$300,000 extra by retirement.
• Recovered unpaid SG: ~$30,000 extra.
• Total potential improvement: around $280,000–$330,000.
• Net effect: instead of retiring $195,000 short, she could end up on or above the comfortable benchmark, effectively reversing the $150,000–$200,000 “women’s super gap” in her own case.

Assumptions: 30‑year horizon to retirement; conservative scenario earning around 5% real vs growth scenario around 8% real (illustrative using doubling rule from Reddit data); all figures in 2024 dollars with no tax/fee adjustments beyond averages implied in cited sources.

What to do about it

1. Check and chase unpaid super

1. Action: Audit your super payments and lodge a complaint if your employer has underpaid.
2. Tool/portal:

• myGov → ATO online → Super → “Information about your super” (shows all contributions reported by employers to the ATO).

3. Steps:

• Log in to myGov, link the ATO service if not already, then go to Super → Employer contributions and download your contribution history for the last 5–10 years.
• Compare each employer’s listed contributions against your payslips (SG should be at least 11.5% of your ordinary time earnings in 2024–25, rising to 12% in 2025–26).
• If contributions are missing or late, first raise it in writing with the employer; if unresolved, lodge an unpaid super enquiry with the ATO, which can pursue the debt and direct payments to your fund.

4. What “good” looks like:

• Every employer has paid at least the legislated SG rate on time, and your annual SG equals at least 11.5% of your ordinary time earnings for 2024–25 (and prior years at the applicable rates).

2. Compare your fund’s fees and returns against the market

1. Action: Benchmark your super fund’s performance and fees, and switch if you’re in a persistent underperformer.
2. Tool/portal:

• APRA MySuper Product Heatmap (public data on fees, returns, and performance tests for MySuper products).
• YourSuper Comparison Tool via the ATO (accessible through myGov) for simple fund comparisons.

3. Steps:

• Log in to myGov → ATO → Super → Compare super funds to see the YourSuper comparison, including your current fund’s fees and net returns.
• Cross‑check your fund’s name against the APRA MySuper Heatmap to see if it has failed performance tests or charges higher‑than‑median fees.
• If your fund has underperformed or has high fees, initiate a rollover online through your new fund or the ATO portal to consolidate into a better‑performing, lower‑fee fund.

4. What “good” looks like:

• You’re in a MySuper or similar default product that has passed APRA’s performance test, charges below‑median fees, and has net returns in the top half of comparable options over the last 5–10 years.

3. Optimise your investment mix and contributions for your age

1. Action: Shift to an age‑appropriate risk profile and set up small, regular extra contributions.
2. Tool/portal:

• Your super fund’s online portal/app (for investment options and contribution settings).
• ATO online (to check concessional caps and carry‑forward room).

3. Steps:

• Log into your super fund and navigate to Investments; review your current option (e.g., conservative, balanced, growth) and read the product disclosure on expected long‑term returns and risk.
• If you are under, say, 55 and have decades to retirement, consider switching from a conservative/balanced default into a growth or lifecycle option that targets higher long‑term returns (within your risk tolerance).
• Set up salary sacrifice or personal deductible contributions – even $50 per week ($2,600 per year) – and check via ATO online that you remain within your concessional contributions cap (currently $30,000 per year from 1 July 2024).

4. What “good” looks like:

• For someone in their 30s–40s, being in a growth or high‑growth allocation appropriate to their risk tolerance, with total concessional contributions (employer + salary sacrifice) aiming close to the $30,000 annual cap if affordable, significantly improving long‑term balances.

A myth worth clearing up

Myth: “Women just have less super because they don’t work as hard or choose lower‑paid jobs — nothing can really be done about it.”

Fact: The super gap is largely structural, driven by pay gaps, unpaid care work, and unpaid super, not individual effort — and targeted actions can materially close it.

• Women working for the median wage are projected to end up with about $393,676 in super, $151,000 below a comfortable target, largely due to lower lifetime earnings and time out of the workforce.
• In 2022–23, 1 in 4 women had unpaid super, missing out on a total of $1.9 billion in contributions; the average affected woman lost $1,300 in a year, worth $26,000 at retirement.
• These are systemic issues, but checking for unpaid super, switching to better‑performing funds, and using concessional caps can together add hundreds of thousands of dollars over a career.

Corrections & disclosure: an AI-assisted, human-reviewed guide. Every figure is dated and sourced above. Spot something out of date or wrong? Tell us and we’ll correct it — corrections are noted here and in the video description.