Where the guidance lives now
On 9 June 2026 ASIC issued an updated Regulatory Guide 234, Advertising financial products and services (including credit). In the same update it withdrew RG 53, its older guide on past performance in promotional material, and consolidated that guidance into RG 234 “so that all advertising guidance is in one place”.
In ASIC’s words, RG 234 contains guidance “to help promoters comply with their legal obligations not to make false or misleading statements or engage in misleading or deceptive conduct”. It applies to advertising in any medium, including social media, and whatever technology produced it, including artificial intelligence.
Three ways a past figure can mislead
The guide opens its section on past performance with the risk itself. Advertising with past performance has a greater risk of being misleading, it says, if it is presented in a way that:
“(a) implies it constitutes a projection illustrating the likely future value of an investment;
(b) creates the impression that substantially the same returns will be achieved in the future; or
(c) gives disproportionate prominence to past performance and implies that simple past performance figures should be the sole or dominant method of selecting a financial product or service.”
ASIC Regulatory Guide 234, RG 234.81
All three are about how a sum from the past is read as a sum about the future. Exercise 1 showed how much a compound figure depends on the rate holding steady; a past return is a record of one stretch of rates, not a promise of the next.
The warning, and where it sits
An advertisement with past performance information “should draw attention (unambiguously and without reservation) to the fact that the past performance is not indicative of future performance”, because some consumers may hold an unrealistic belief about its predictive power. The warning belongs on the same page as the figures (online, without a click-through), in an easily read size, and “not be buried among other text”.
Wording RG 234 offers
“Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance”
“Investments can go up and down and past performance is not necessarily indicative of future performance”
Wording it calls less likely to work
“Past performance is not a guarantee of future performance”
“Future returns may vary”
The difference is small on the page and large in meaning. RG 234 says a warning is likely to be ineffective “if it might be interpreted as implying a likelihood (though no guarantee) that past performance will be repeated (unless such an implication can be substantiated)”. “Not a guarantee” leaves room for “probably”; “not a reliable indicator” does not. (The last sentence is this guide’s reading.)
Which years, and how fresh
The standard periods are what make one advertised return comparable with another. RG 234 sets them out, with the rules that go with them:
| Point | What RG 234 says | Paragraph |
|---|---|---|
| Standard period | The single per annum return over the previous five years, or over the whole period the investment has been available if that is less than five years. A “year” here means 12 months, not a calendar or financial year. | RG 234.93 |
| At least as prominent | Figures for other periods may be shown if they are not misleading, as long as the standard-period figures are also given and are at least as prominent. | RG 234.97 |
| Under a year | Promoting an investment on less than a year of performance would usually be inappropriate and may be misleading (cash-type investments excluded). | RG 234.99 |
| Up to date | In easily updated media, such as the internet, performance data is not up to date if more than three months have passed since its end date: 31 December figures would not be up to date online in April. | RG 234.102 |
| Annualising | Returns for a year or more should be annualised; returns for less than a year should not be (cash-type investments are the exception). | RG 234.106 |
| Comparisons | When comparing similar products, the period used should be the same as, or similar to, the advertised product’s. | RG 234.96 |
| Foreign currency | Returns calculated in a foreign currency should be pointed out, and if Australian dollar returns would be significantly different, both should be shown. | RG 234.108 |
Moneysmart’s advice on comparing super funds runs the same way from the reader’s side: look at five-year returns, or longer, for the same investment option across funds.
Three of ASIC’s own examples
The word “performing”
A managed investment scheme advertised itself as “the best performing of all funds sold in Australia over 15 years”. ASIC was concerned that “performing” suggested the same returns would continue, and that past performance was presented as the sole or dominant way to choose. The scheme withdrew the advertisement.
The one good fund
In a hypothetical, “ABC Funds” promotes its excellent returns by quoting one fund’s five-year return of 18% a year, 3% a year above the sector median. ASIC says the promotion “may be misleading if most of ABC’s funds had five-year returns below the sector median”.
The old ten years
A super fund trustee advertised 10-year performance figures that did not relate to the period just before the advertisement or to the latest figures available; the advertised figures were higher than the more recent ones, and the period was not stated. ASIC issued infringement notices.
Figures from before an investment existed
Some advertisements show how a product would have performed had it existed: “hypothetical”, “simulated” or “modelled” past performance. RG 234 calls this “non-actual” performance and asks promoters to take “extreme care”, because people may assume it shows how the investment would really have performed. It advises against the word “indicative” for such figures, as some people may read it as indicative of future returns.
“If a mathematical model has been created with the benefit of hindsight, ‘back-testing’ data may give a misleading impression of the fund manager’s ability to choose a strategy that will succeed in the future.”
ASIC Regulatory Guide 234, RG 234.116
In general, RG 234 says, non-actual performance may only be usable without misleading in two cases: a new fund identical to an existing one except for its fees, or a new fund that will mirror an index.
And figures about the future
Forecasts belong in an advertisement only where they are relevant and there are reasonable grounds for them. RG 234 points to section 769C of the Corporations Act: a representation about a future matter for a financial product, made without reasonable grounds, is taken to be misleading. The last exercise follows that thread to promises of returns.