You might expect Australians in their early 70s to have less superannuation than those in their early 60s. After all, many people have stopped working by that age and may have spent several years drawing on their retirement savings.

Interestingly, the latest figures show the opposite, with Australians in their early 70s holding more super on average than those a decade younger.

So, what are the numbers, and what can they tell us about retirement?

The average superannuation balance at 60

According to Moneysmart, using the latest Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) data, Australians aged 60 to 64 have an average superannuation balance of $270,800.

This provides a rough guide for someone turning 60, although individual balances will vary considerably depending on their working history, earnings, contributions, and investment returns.

At this age, retirement plans can look very different from person to person. Some Australians have already finished working, while others intend to continue for several more years.

That is important because retiring at 60 can mean funding seven years of living expenses before reaching Age Pension eligibility at 67. Someone who continues working, meanwhile, may have the opportunity to build their balance further while delaying withdrawals.

What about at age 70?

By age 70, many Australians have already spent several years in retirement, but that doesn’t necessarily mean their superannuation balances have fallen significantly.

According to the latest figures, Australians aged 70 to 74 have an average superannuation balance of $312,000, which is higher than the $270,800 average for those aged 60 to 64.

One reason retirees can maintain substantial balances is that their super generally remains invested after they stop working. While they may be withdrawing money to fund their lifestyles, the remaining savings can continue generating investment returns.

Others may have delayed retirement or continued working part time, allowing them to preserve more of their savings. They may also be half of a couple, sharing expenses and depleting their balances slower.

How do these figures compare with retirement targets?

The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia estimates that a single homeowner needs approximately $630,000 at retirement to support a comfortable lifestyle, while a couple needs around $730,000 combined.

Both average balances are well below the single-person benchmark, but that doesn’t necessarily mean Australians with these amounts will struggle financially.

The Age Pension can provide an important source of income for eligible Australians from age 67, while couples may benefit from combining their super balances and sharing household expenses.

Retirement timing also makes a significant difference. Someone retiring at 60 may need to fund seven years of living expenses before reaching Age Pension age, whereas a person retiring at 70 is already old enough to qualify, subject to their financial circumstances and other eligibility requirements.

Ultimately, whether a particular super balance is enough will depend on when you retire, your expected living expenses, and what other sources of income you have available. This is why retirement planning needs to go beyond simply comparing your balance with the national average.

The post Here's the average superannuation balance at 60 and 70 in Australia appeared first on The Motley Fool Australia.

More reading

• Here are the top 10 ASX 200 shares today
• 5 things to watch on the ASX 200 on Friday
• Average superannuation balance at 45. How does yours compare?
• Here are the top 10 ASX 200 shares today
• 5 things to watch on the ASX 200 on Thursday

Motley Fool contributor James Mickleboro has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.

Paladin Energy Ltd (ASX: PDN) shares are down almost 30% over the past 12 months, and according to the analyst team at Shaw and Partners, that just shouldn’t be the case.

Paladin Energy shares at historic lows

The broker has just released a new research report on Paladin, pointing out that its shares are trading near a 14-month low.

In their own words, “that makes no sense to us”.

They added:

The uranium price continues to tick higher, the outlook for the uranium industry could hardly be stronger, and Paladin is making excellent progress with the world class Patterson Lake South Project.

Shaw and Partners said the company did miss consensus expectations for its quarterly production result, with the one million pound result about 140,000 pounds lower than expectations.

This amount was worth about $5 million to the company, but its market capitalisation fell $340 million on the news.

Shaw and Partners noted that despite the production miss, annual production guidance was maintained at 5.1-5.6 million pounds of uranium.

They did put forward another potential explanation for the share price weakness.

Perhaps another reason for the stock weakness today is that cash flow in the quarter was weak. Paladin’s cash balance has reduced from US$265m at 30-Jun to US$209m at 30 Sep. This is mainly a function of the timing of customer receipts (US$71m), which were around US$20m lower than revenue and well down on June quarter receipts of US$158m. The company expects receipts to rebound in the December quarter.

Paladin Energy shares looking very cheap

Shaw and Partners noted that Paladin had made good progress at Patterson Lake during the quarter, with regulatory processes moving forward and exploration success at the emerging Atlas and Saloon East Discoveries.

The broker added:

We maintain our BUY recommendation and $19.10 Price Target which is based on our discounted cash flow valuation of Langer Heinrich and Patterson Lake. On our modelling, in our view, the PDN share price pullback below $10 per share is presenting investors with an excellent opportunity to gain exposure to a quality uranium company which is in its strongest position since recapitalising in 2021.

Paladin Managing Director Paul Hemburrow said the result was impacted by the shutdown and pit transition at Langer Heinrich, “with feed grade, plant performance and in-circuit inventory improving during September”.

The company had $US209 million in cash at the end of the quarter.

Paladin shares are changing hands for $7.11 at the time of writing. The company is currently valued at $3.21 billion.

The post Why the Paladin Energy share price "doesn't make sense" appeared first on The Motley Fool Australia.

More reading

• Buy, hold, sell: Paladin Energy, Fortescue, Rio Tinto shares
• 5 ASX 200 stocks analysts have upgraded this week
• 3 ASX shares tipped by brokers to return 41% to 85% in the next 12 months
• Could Paladin Energy shares return 90% in 12 months?
• Own ASX mining shares? Official forecasts show commodity prices peaking in FY27

Motley Fool contributor Cameron England has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.

ANZ vs Westpac shares: Which big four bank is best for your $5,000?

If you’re thinking about investing in one of Australia’s big four banks, odds are you’re weighing up ANZ Group Holdings Ltd (ASX: ANZ) and Westpac Banking Corporation (ASX: WBC) Both are banking giants with deep roots in the Aussie and Kiwi economies, and both offer investors a slice of the nation’s financial backbone. But if you had $5,000 to put to work, which should you choose? Let’s look at the key differences between ANZ and Westpac shares.

The case for ANZ

ANZ is a powerhouse of Australian banking, tracing its roots back to 1969 and now serving over 8.5 million customers, according to its company profile. ANZ covers just about every corner of the banking world, from retail and small business to corporate and institutional clients, and its operations stretch across 30 international markets, including major presences in Australia, New Zealand, Asia Pacific, the UK, and the US.

A couple of the big-ticket fundamentals stand out:

• Market cap: $115.51 billion – making ANZ one of the largest stocks on the ASX
• P/E ratio: 19.46 – a touch above Westpac, suggesting investors are willing to pay more for each dollar of earnings
• Dividend yield: 4.32% – steady income but not the top among the big four
• Franking: 75% – lower than fully franked rivals, potentially less appealing for those seeking maximum franking credits

Looking at its dividend history, ANZ has a long record of reliable payments, though recent years have seen some reductions in franking levels. The most current interim dividend is $0.83 per share, 75% franked.

The case for Westpac

Westpac is the oldest banking institution in Australia, launched in 1817 as the Bank of New South Wales before becoming Westpac Banking Corp in 1982. These days, it stands tall as one of the big four, serving millions of Australian and New Zealand customers under multiple brands like Westpac, St.George, Bank of Melbourne, BankSA, and BT. The group covers everything from consumer and business banking to institutional services and wealth management.

Key fundamentals for Westpac include:

• Market cap: $118.65 billion – slightly ahead of ANZ, putting it near the very top of the big four by size
• P/E ratio: 17.33 – lower than ANZ, which could suggest better relative value if both banks face similar outlooks
• Dividend yield: 4.38% – slightly higher than ANZ, and every cent counts for income seekers
• Franking: 100% – meaning fully franked dividends, which is a bonus for investors who can use franking credits

Westpac’s dividend payment history is also strong, with regular dividends and, notably, fully franked payouts. Its most recent interim dividend is $0.77 per share, fully franked, plus a $0.15 special dividend in 2024.

Valuation comparison

Here’s how ANZ and Westpac stack up on the main investment yardsticks:

Metric	ANZ	Westpac
Market Cap	$115.51 billion	$118.65 billion
P/E Ratio	19.46	17.33
Dividend Yield	4.32%	4.38%
Dividend Franking	75%	100%
Dividend per Share	$1.66	$1.54
Earnings per Share	1.973	2.029

Note: ANZ’s reported P/E ratio may be based on a different earnings measure than the EPS shown, which can lead to apparent inconsistencies.

Overall, Westpac looks just a little more attractive on both P/E ratio and dividend yield. Its fully franked dividends could also make a meaningful difference for some investors. ANZ edges ahead on dividend per share, but Westpac’s higher franking boosts its after-tax income for most Aussies.

Recent share price momentum

Comparing recent share price performance up to14 October 2026:

• ANZ: Closed at $38.30. Year-to-date return is a solid 7.9%.
• Westpac: Closed at $34.69. Year-to-date return is -6.9%, meaning its share price has lagged in 2026.

Just in the past fortnight of data provided, both shares have seen daily ups and downs, but the real story is in the overall 2026 trend: ANZ is up, while Westpac is down.

Which is the better buy?

If I had $5,000 to invest in one of these banks today, I’d lean toward ANZ. Here’s my reasoning: While Westpac edges out ANZ on dividend yield and offers fully franked dividends, ANZ has meaningfully outperformed in recent months, posting a near 8% gain year-to-date while Westpac’s shares are in the red. The market is putting a slightly higher valuation on ANZ, reflected in its P/E, and while that does often mean higher expectations, I think the combination of global exposure, steady growth, and recent price strength tips the scales in ANZ’s favour. Westpac is no slouch, and its fully franked dividends are a real drawcard for income hunters, but the negative price momentum worries me here. For a blend of reasonable income, international reach, and current momentum, my pick would be ANZ.

The post ANZ vs Westpac shares: Which big four bank is the better buy for $5,000? appeared first on The Motley Fool Australia.

More reading

• How much do I need in my superannuation to generate a $108,000 annual passive income?
• Telstra vs ANZ: Which ASX blue chip is better for retirees?
• How much passive income can I earn off a $700,000 superannuation balance?
• Westpac vs BHP: Which ASX giant is the better buy right now?
• CSL, Westpac, BHP shares: Buy, hold, or sell?

Motley Fool contributor Laura Stewart has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia’s parent company Motley Fool Holdings Inc. has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool Australia has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips. This article was prepared with the assistance of Large Language Model (LLM) tools for the initial draft. Any content assisted by AI is subject to our robust human-in-the-loop quality control framework, involving thorough review, substantial editing, and fact-checking by our experienced writers and editors holding appropriate credentials. The Motley Fool Australia stands behind the work of our editorial team and takes ultimate responsibility for the content published by The Motley Fool Australia.