A major Australian superannuation fund has been accused of greenwashing after retaining a “sustainable” label for one of its investment options despite significantly reducing its environmental criteria.
UniSuper, which manages A$158 billion on behalf of around 670,000 members, markets its Global Environmental Opportunities (GEO) option as a portfolio selected on environmental considerations.
The option was originally restricted to companies and assets deriving at least 40% of their revenue from environmental themes, including alternative energy, energy efficiency and green buildings. It also applied negative screens, excluding exposure to sectors such as fossil fuels and weapons.
In March 2025, UniSuper lowered the revenue threshold to 20%, broadening the range of eligible investments. The GEO option now lists several technology firms, including Microsoft and Nvidia, among its top holdings.
The Environmental Defenders Office has lodged a formal complaint with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) on behalf of UniSuper member John Dixon. The complaint alleges the fund may have made potentially misleading representations by retaining the option’s name and continuing to display it under “sustainable and environmental branded options” on its website despite the revised criteria.
A UniSuper spokesperson said the changes were intended “to expand the investible universe while maintaining the option’s environmental theme”.
Dixon said he was surprised to see technology companies among the option’s largest investments, including firms with what he described as significant and rising greenhouse gas emissions. “I thought, this can’t be right, someone has made a mistake,” he said.
UniSuper informed members of the changes through its website and an email directing them to a PDF document. Dixon argued that the communication lacked clarity. “Having made the change they really didn’t explain it to members. Hardly anybody would have twigged,” he said.
In its letter to ASIC, the Environmental Defenders Office said the weakening of the investment criteria, combined with limited communication, increased the likelihood that existing and prospective investors had been misled. The organisation has asked the regulator to investigate.
Dixon said he first raised concerns with UniSuper in August but decided to pursue a formal complaint after receiving a response he considered unsatisfactory. He has called on the fund to rename the option and provide clearer disclosure regarding changes to its investment criteria.
