Call to diversify into digital assets
Mr Titman, who is also executive chairman of the crypto exchange which serves more than 1.5 million users, said diversification into digital assets, even at a small allocation, could dramatically shift long-term outcomes for many Kiwis.
He is the keynote speaker at CryptoWinter25 — the inaugural summit for New Zealand's emerging crypto and digital asset leadership — in Queenstown this week.
Mr Titman said a lack of diversification and a narrow focus on traditional asset classes were contributing to delayed retirement horizons for many Kiwis, despite a record $112 billion now held in KiwiSaver funds.
Analysis by Swyftx showed if a typical KiwiSaver member had invested $36,500 in Bitcoin over the past decade, equivalent to $10 a day, they would now hold a portfolio worth about $2.8 million.
The average balanced KiwiSaver fund had returned about 6% to 7% annually over the same period. An equivalent $36,500 investment into a typical KiwiSaver fund would have grown to around $65,000 to $70,000 today.
Mr Titman, who is also a chartered accountant, said New Zealand remained behind its international counterparts. Global regulators and pension funds in countries such as Canada, Germany and Singapore had begun integrating crypto and other digital assets into broader retirement strategies.
Only two KiwiSaver providers offered any exposure to digital assets, which were now a mainstream component of diversified investment portfolios internationally, and he believed financial advisers needed to broaden their education on emerging asset classes.
High-net-worth families had been early adopters of digital assets, recognising their growing potential as a legitimate diversification tool within a long-term investment strategy.
"It's a clear example of the opportunity cost facing retirement savers when portfolios remain too narrow," he said.
The issue was not about taking excessive risk but modernising portfolio design.
"We're not talking about putting someone's retirement on the line ... We're talking about disciplined allocation, say 3% to 5%, to a high-growth, emerging asset class that has already demonstrated long-term return potential. It's about optimising performance, not taking unnecessary risk," he said.
An increased allocation into digital assets could also support local market development, create jobs and broaden the tax base from investment gains and industry growth, he said.
— Allied Media
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
Buyer beware: extra clauses found added to home purchase
Real estate agents have been caught adding additional clauses into standard sale-and-purchase agreements, which lawyers say could have dire consequences for homeowners. The Real Estate Institute says it has been made aware of some real estate agencies inserting clauses into the Agreement for Sale and Purchase of Real Estate, forcing buyers to waive their title requisition rights and authorise early release of their deposits. Title requisition rights allow a purchaser to request the vendor to rectify defects or issues on the property title before settlement, and if a sale falls through after an early release, the buyer may have no way to recover the funds. This risk is heightened for buyers using KiwiSaver, as the terms for using KiwiSaver funds require the deposit to remain in trust until settlement. The Law Association's Property Law Committee alerted the Real Estate Institute to the clauses that were being covertly added. The REINZ declined to comment. The president of the Law Association is Tony Herring. Photo: 123RF
Otago Daily Times
7 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Will axing petrol tax be a game-changer?
Scrapping petrol tax may, or many not, be transformative, Angela Curl and Caroline Shaw write. The way we get around is unfair, and unhealthy. Some people travel a lot, creating disproportionate harms on people and the planet, such as pollution, injury risk and physical inactivity. Others cannot afford to travel enough, missing out on things that are important, such as catching up with loved ones or healthcare appointments, or end up having to forego expenditure on other important things, such as food. Replacing fuel excise duty (or petrol tax) with electronic road user charges for all vehicles — as announced by Transport Minister Chris Bishop last week — offers an opportunity to transform the way we fund and pay for our transport system in a way that works for people and the planet by reflecting the true costs imposed when we use the roads. Bishop said "it isn't fair to have Kiwis who drive less and can't afford a fuel-efficient car paying more than people who can afford one and drive more often." On the whole, we agree. We know that those households with the lowest income drive far less (about 100km a week less) but also have to spend a much greater proportion of their income on getting around (16% of income compared with 9% for higher-income households). Those on lower incomes are also far less likely to be able to afford an electric vehicle with cheaper running costs, instead paying the relatively more expensive petrol tax. However, Bishop's proposal represents a narrow view of the harms, or wider costs, of driving to society. It is largely based on the assumption all vehicles should contribute "fairly" (based on weight and distance travelled) towards road maintenance, operations and improvements. But a pricing structure that also accounts for the costs to our health system of injuries, pollution and physical inactivity caused by the transport system, might also include differential charging for different types of vehicles. For example, we know that SUVs cause more severe injuries to those outside of the vehicle, and while EVs reduce tailpipe emissions, they still contribute to congestion and injury risk. The proposal does suggest that weight, as well as distance travelled, will be factored into pricing; however, it should also consider the damage that heavier and larger vehicles do to people and the environment. A change in the way we are charged for using the roads offers a real opportunity to design a progressive charge that alleviates costs pressures for those already struggling to pay for the driving they need to do, while reducing levels of driving overall. One way to achieve this would be through increasing the rate per km, above a certain amount of kilometres driven. Given the costs involved in running and operating the scheme, and that this needs to be revenue-generating for government, it seems unlikely there will be a reduction in the cost of travel in real terms for everyone. However, if the government is committed to fairness, it needs to ensure costs do not escalate for those who can least afford it and who have few alternatives. The proposed changes to road user charges are most likely to be successful and acceptable if they are accompanied by investment in public transport, walking and cycling and alongside strategic urban planning that supports local access to the things we all need such as shops, schools and sports grounds. The most straightforward way to ensure that charging for using the roads does not force people into situations where they have to forego other essentials is to ensure that it is easy and safe to get around in other ways, or that we do not need to travel as much. For both fairness and health and wellbeing we need to continue to improve travel options other than driving. Bishop presented this as a new way to fund our roads, but we should be taking a more holistic view — this is an opportunity to think about how we fund our transport system. Using revenue raised to reduce the need to drive can make charging for driving more acceptable. Bishop said: "This is a once-in-a-generation change. It's the right thing to do, it's the fair thing to do, and it will future-proof how we fund our roads for decades to come." This policy has the potential to be truly transformative and be part of creating a transport system (not just roads) that is fairer, and healthier for everyone. It can be done. The question is, will it? — Newsroom • Dr Angela Curl is a senior lecturer in the University of Otago department of population health, Christchurch; Caroline Shaw is a lecturer and researcher in the department of public health, University of Otago, Wellington.
Otago Daily Times
7 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Genetics tool popular
Otago farmers have been using the nProve Beef genetics tool to make better breeding decisions and drive genetic improvement in their herds, Beef + Lamb New Zealand says. Farming excellence general manager Dan Brier said sessions on the nProve platform surged by 76% from March to June 2025 compared with the same period last year. The top five regions using the tool were Otago, greater Auckland, Canterbury, greater Wellington and Manawatū-Whanganui. Session growth in the period increased from 5069 to 8902, mostly due to the launch of nProve Beef, which attracted 3800 sessions, making up 41% of total traffic, he said. The nProve Beef tool was a key output of the Informing New Zealand Beef programme, which aimed to enable the uptake of improved genetics across the beef industry by providing farmers with practical tools tailored to New Zealand farming systems, Mr Brier said. "The response to nProve Beef has exceeded expectations." — ALLIED MEDIA
