Since mid-May, the S&P/ASX 200 Index (ASX: XJO) has held up relatively well. Despite some volatility along the way, the ASX 200 presently sits about 2% above where it was back on 19 May. However, we cannot say the same for Telstra Group Ltd (ASX: TLS) shares.

Back in May, Telstra had just hit a new 52-week (and multi-year) high of $5.55 a share. Today, those same shares sit at a far less impressive $4.65 each. That’s after the nasty 2.6% plunge that we are witnessing today.

Given that Telstra first started exploring this territory back in September, it might be easy to blame the telco’s full-year earnings that month for the lacklustre reception Telstra shares are still on the pointy end of. To be fair, these earnings didn’t exactly light up the room. Telstra reported a 0.8% drop in revenues to $22.94 billion. Despite that, the company still managed to reveal a 4.9% rise in underlying net profits after tax to $2.5 billion, as well as a 14% increase in cash earnings per share (EPS) to 25.5 cents.

This allowed Telstra to boost its 2026 final dividend by 10.5% to 10.5 cents per share. A $1 billion share buyback program was also announced.

So why then have Telstra shares taken such a dramatic plunge since May? Well, we can’t totally rule out a poor reception of these earnings. After all, if Telstra’s revenues continue to flatline in the years ahead, its current price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 23.4 arguably starts to look a little generous.

However, I think there’s another factor at play here: interest rates.

Telstra shares fall as interest rates rise

Telstra is first and foremost known as one of the ASX’s best and most reliable dividend payers. Many, if not most, of those Australian investors who own Telstra shares do so with the expectation of receiving fat dividend cheques, with at least some franking credits attached.

As we’ve already touched on, Telstra is continuing to deliver in this department. But perhaps the problem is the growing attractiveness of alternative sources of passive income.

2026 has been a dramatic year when it comes to interest rates. The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has already hiked rates three times this year. Although the cash rate now sits at a 15-year high of 4.6%, many commentators anticipate it hasn’t finished its current cycle yet. Most Australians understandably associate high interest rates with more painful mortgage repayments. However, this 4.6% cash rate has also resulted in the returns from term deposits and savings accounts exploding. Today, and for the first time in 15 years, one can open a term deposit with an interest rate of over 5.5% per annum – unheard of for years.

Back when Telstra was sitting at $5.55 a share, it would have only been offering a dividend yield of under 3.8%. You can see why more than a few investors would just take the risk-free 5% return instead.

Perhaps the company is finding more buyers at the current price of $4.65. That offers up a much improved 4.52% yield. But as a company that could be described as a bond proxy, I don’t find it at all surprising to see demand for Telstra shares drop off when risk-free passive income is looking so lucrative. Unless Telstra can start growing its revenues at a healthy rate again, or until interest rates start coming down, I’m not expecting to see Telstra shares back above $5 anytime soon.

The post Why have Telstra shares lost 16% since May? appeared first on The Motley Fool Australia.

More reading

• How much is needed in superannuation to target a $100,000 annual passive income?
• How much superannuation do I need to generate $100,000 per year in passive income?
• Woolworths Group vs Telstra Group: Which ASX blue chip pays better passive income?
• My favourite ASX passive income shares for retirees
• How much passive income can I earn from a $950,000 superannuation balance?

Motley Fool contributor Sebastian Bowen 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 positions in and has recommended Telstra Group. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. This article contains general investment advice only (under AFSL 400691). Authorised by Scott Phillips.

It’s important to know how much superannuation you have accumulated at any age.

But your late 50s and 60s are a crossroads in life when the amount you have saved will directly affect the type of retirement lifestyle you live when you decide to stop working.

At age 55, many Aussies are approaching their final decade of working life. At this point, you’re just five years away from your preservation age. That’s when you can access your super, provided you’ve stopped working. 

By age 65, you can get full access to your superannuation regardless of whether you’re still working or not.  

So, how does your balance compare to other Aussies the same age? And how does it compare to how much super you should actually have at age 55 and age 65? 

Let’s take a look.

What’s the average superannuation balance of Aussies aged 55 in Australia?

There aren’t exact figures for the average balance at age 55, but the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) has a rough guide.

The data shows that the average Australian male aged 55 to 59 has around $319,743 in their superannuation.

Women in the same age bracket have a lot less. That’s because women tend to take time out of the workforce or work reduced hours to raise children or care for other family members. This means they earn less superannuation income and earn less compound growth on a lower balance. 

The average balance for Australian women aged 55 to 59 is around $242,945. That’s a gap of around $77,000 compared to men the same age.

How does your super balance stack up with men and women the same age as you?

What’s the average superannuation balance for Aussies aged 65 in Australia?

Again, ASFA provides a guide. The data shows that the average Australian male aged 65 to 69 has around $448,518 in their superannuation.

Women in the same age bracket have closer to $392,274. By this age bracket, it looks like some women have started to catch up. Perhaps that’s because many have returned to work full-time over the past decade as their children have grown older. 

But that’s still a gap of over $56,000 compared to men the same age.

How much do you need at age 55 to be able to retire comfortably?

ASFA data concludes that a comfortable retirement is expected to cost around $56,166 per year for individuals and $78,998 combined per year for couples.

To afford that, by retirement, a single person will need a superannuation balance of around $630,000. Meanwhile, couples will need around $730,000.

The data assumes you’ll begin retirement from age 67, will earn a part Age Pension, and that you own your home outright.

In order to be on track to reach that $630,000 goal, Australians should have at least $348,500 in their superannuation at age 55.

That’s a lot less than the average balances of both men and women at age 55.

How much do you need at age 65 to retire comfortably?

I’ve run the numbers for what you should have at age 65, too.

Again, ASFA expects that you’ll retire at age 67, will earn a part-Age Pension, and that you own your home outright.

In order to be considered as on track to reach $650,000 within the next two years, Australians at age 65 should have around $578,000 in their superannuation.

How does your balance compare now?

The post The average superannuation balance at age 55 versus 65 in Australia appeared first on The Motley Fool Australia.

More reading

• Down 29% so far in 2026: What do brokers tip next for Fortescue shares?
• Why have Telstra shares lost 16% since May?
• Fortescue vs Rio Tinto: Which ASX mining giant is the better buy today?
• Should you buy Lynas and this ASX share at their 52-week lows?
• Nextdc vs WiseTech: Which ASX tech stock is better for a 25 year old investor?

Motley Fool contributor Samantha Menzies 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.

Fortescue Ltd vs Rio Tinto shares: Which mining giant should you buy?

The battle of the mining titans on the ASX often boils down to two names: Fortescue Ltd (ASX: FMG) and Rio Tinto Ltd (ASX: RIO). For Aussie investors seeking exposure to resources, these two offer world-class scale, strong dividend histories, and a front-row seat to the global iron ore trade. But if you’re pondering “Fortescue vs Rio Tinto shares,” what makes one stand out over the other right now? Here’s my take.

The case for Fortescue

Fortescue is a pure-play iron ore producer based in Western Australia’s Pilbara region. Over the past two decades, it’s evolved from a latecomer into the world’s fourth-largest iron ore miner, with operations including Chichester, Solomon, and Western Hubs, plus its own port and railway infrastructure. Fortescue’s focus on efficiency and cost control means it’s earned its reputation as a very profitable, high-yielding miner.

What leaps out in the numbers is Fortescue’s fully franked 7.04% dividend yield, one of the highest yields on the ASX, supported by a payout of $1.08 per share. The company sits on a market cap of $47.23 billion, with a P/E ratio of 11.47 — noticeably lower than Rio Tinto’s. Fortescue manages integrated infrastructure from mine to port, giving it a cost advantage over some rivals.

Despite these strengths, Fortescue shares are down 25.4% year to date, reflecting recent commodity price volatility and market sentiment. Still, for investors hoping for strong passive income from resources, the mix of yield, franking, and scale is compelling.

The case for Rio Tinto

Rio Tinto is a giant in global mining, with a diversified portfolio beyond iron ore. Alongside its huge Pilbara iron ore operation, Rio produces aluminium, copper, and emerging minerals like lithium. This breadth not only gives Rio some insulation from wobbly iron ore prices, but also means it taps into global trends around electrification and infrastructure.

Rio’s market cap leads the sector at $60.37 billion, and its shares currently yield 4.09%, fully franked. The company’s annual dividend per share is a hefty $6.63, and its P/E ratio sits at 15.31 — higher than Fortescue’s, perhaps reflecting Rio’s diversification and consistent profit stream. Rio has been a fixture on the ASX since 1962 and has grown dramatically through both acquisition and organic means.

What’s also striking is recent momentum: Rio shares are up 15.1% year to date, far outpacing Fortescue. This price action hints that the market is warming to Rio’s more diversified model, or at least viewing it as a safer bet amid sector turbulence.

Valuation comparison

To make the key differences clear, here’s how the metrics stack up:

Metric	Fortescue	Rio Tinto
Market Cap	$47.23 billion	$60.37 billion
P/E Ratio	11.47	15.31
Dividend Yield	7.04% (100% franked)	4.09% (100% franked)
Dividend per Share	$1.08	$6.63
Earnings per Share	0.931	7.382

Note: While EPS for both companies is positive, the P/E ratios reflect materially different share price levels and capital structures, not just profitability.

It’s clear that Fortescue offers a juicier yield and a lower P/E, but Rio claims a bigger market cap and stronger recent price momentum. Both companies pay fully franked dividends.

Recent share price momentum

Comparing recent share price performance up to 9 October 2026:

• Fortescue closed at $15.34, falling 2.85% on the day and down 25.4% year to date.
• Rio Tinto closed at $162.37, rising 0.25% on the day and up 15.1% year to date.

These numbers make it clear that while Rio has delivered strong gains in 2026 so far, Fortescue has faced heavy selling pressure, likely due to macro and sector-specific headwinds.

Which is the better buy?

If I had to make the call today, my pick would be Rio Tinto. The reason is twofold: firstly, the diversified business spreads risk across various minerals and markets, meaning it’s not just a play on iron ore prices. Secondly, that 15.1% year-to-date return shows clear positive momentum, suggesting the market appreciates Rio’s current position and outlook.

That said, Fortescue’s much higher dividend yield, lower P/E, and deep franking credits could make it a better income play for investors who believe iron ore prices will rebound. But the steep -25.4% YTD return makes me cautious for now, as it may signal deeper sector weakness or company-specific challenges.

Bottom line: I’m leaning toward Rio Tinto as the better-balanced and more resilient choice today — but wouldn’t rule out Fortescue as an option for yield hunters chasing a recovery.

The post Fortescue vs Rio Tinto: Which ASX mining giant is the better buy today? appeared first on The Motley Fool Australia.

More reading

• Down 29% so far in 2026: What do brokers tip next for Fortescue shares?
• Fortescue vs BHP: Which ASX miner is better for passive income in October?
• 9 ASX 200 shares upgraded by brokers this week
• 6 ASX shares downgraded by experts this week
• Is the Fortescue share price a bargain buy?

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.