The Australian sharemarket has had a remarkably strong run since December 2023, when the S&P/ASX 200 index was around 7,000. In recent weeks the index topped 9,000 for the first time, a rise of about 16% on an annualised basis over this 21-month period.

This strong performance comes despite the economy and many companies facing difficult times. Recent earnings performance of companies has been mixed, and doesn’t seem to warrant such strong stockmarket growth. This raises the question of whether the market is due for a fall.

On Wednesday, the market posted its biggest one-day decline since April, losing 1.8%, for its fourth straight down day.

How to think about fair value

The best way to think about the “right” value for the stockmarket is to remember that when you are buying a share in a company, you are buying a share of their future dividends, which will in turn be related to the company’s earnings.

Economists and finance professionals use the “price-to-earnings ratio” as a way of assessing whether a company’s shares are high or low. This “PE ratio” compares a company’s share price with its earnings per share, and it can be used for comparisons with history, with competitors in the market, or with the stockmarket as a whole.

Take the Commonwealth Bank for example, which is held by all the superannuation funds. The bank has recently been trading at around A$170 a share, and its last 12 months’ earnings per share were about $6. So the price-to-earnings ratio is about 28.3.

For the stockmarket as a whole (more than 2,300 companies), the current PE ratio is about 25, which is well above the average PE ratio historically of around 16 in Australia.

Both the Commonwealth Bank, and the market as a whole, are “expensive” compared with historical valuations using this measurement. So are they going to fall?

The important point to note is that price-to-earnings ratios are based on past earnings. When you buy a share, it is not past earnings but future earnings that will determine future dividends and the value of the company. High PE ratios tell us that investors in the sharemarket see a rosy future, with rising profits and dividends.

Interest rates are a big factor

Price-to-earnings ratios might also be high because interest rates are still low by historical standards.

Low interest rates support businesses and future earnings. Low rates also lead investors to switch from low-return bonds and term deposits to higher yielding shares. This interest rate effect has been very strong in recent years, and explains part of the current market strength.

Another factor leading to strong sharemarket growth has been the surge in prices of artificial intelligence (AI) and related tech stocks. As with the internet boom in the late 1990s, there are hopes we are headed for a “new economy,” and many companies with good exposure to AI and technology might see earnings surge in future years.

Of course, the internet boom of the 1990s ended with the dotcom crash of 2000, when the high-tech Nasdaq index of stocks in the United States lost more than 60% of its market capitalisation in two years, to a low of around 1,300.

Yet the Nasdaq index today stands at more than 21,000. Many internet companies were wiped out during 2000 to 2002 – but those that survived are some of today’s titans.

For example, Amazon’s total market value has surged from a low of US$7 billion in 2002 to US$2.4 trillion now, with a PE ratio of 35.

This AI-related boom is a key consideration of many investors. Sure, some companies might not make it – but if you can hold on to the right ones you could make a very tidy return.

The new economy doesn’t apply to Australia

The new economy argument is not as strong a driver of Australia’s equity market, with our banks and miners dominating the market rather than tech companies.

Australian companies are seen as either safe and having solid profit growth due to low competition and scale (the banks), or exposure to a rapidly growing China (the miners).

So where will the market go? Yes, the market is expensive. But
as economist Burton Malkiel argued in his influential analysis of the US stockmarket in 1973, A Random Walk Down Wall Street, nothing can predict movements in stocks.

He said that on average, the market should rise by about 6% or 7% a year – a return above interest rates to compensate for the higher risk. (The Australian stockmarket has returned about 6% per year over its history.) But nothing can predict whether the market will have a better or a worse year than this normal return.

Importantly, a recent run of good returns does not predict the market will do worse in the coming year – and nor does it predict the market will do better.

Malkiel’s point is that the market might be in “bubble” territory and about to fall – but predicting when and how far is a mug’s game.

Mark Crosby, Professor of Economics, Monash University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Australian economy picked up strength in the June quarter as consumers opened their wallets, boosted by interest rate cuts earlier in the year.

New figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics showed gross domestic product (GDP) grew by 0.6% in the June quarter and 1.8% over the year — the strongest outcome in two years and above market and economists’ expectations.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the report showed “a welcome and substantial pick-up in growth”. The increase followed growth of just 0.3% in the March quarter, which was heavily impacted by extreme weather events.

According to the Bureau, household spending provided the main lift, and government spending to a lesser extent. The overall result suggests the economy is starting to turn a corner after a run of weaker quarters.

Households are regaining confidence

Household consumption rose 0.9% — the strongest increase since December 2022 — contributing 0.4 percentage points to growth. Discretionary spending drove the gains, with recreation, transport and hospitality boosted by the Easter and ANZAC Day holidays, overseas travel, and strong event attendance. The rise suggests households are regaining confidence, helped by recent cash rate cuts.

Government spending added a further 0.2 percentage points, with increased spending on Medicare and pharmaceutical benefits, and defence.

Exports also helped: education and tourism services were strong, while iron ore and liquefied natural gas shipments to major Asian markets remained solid. Exports rose 1.7% and imports were up 1.4% in the quarter.

However, public investment in infrastructure such as roads and rail dropped 3.9% as large projects neared completion in several states, weighing on growth.

Interest rate cuts are flowing through

Looking ahead, the economy is starting to build some momentum. Household spending is lifting, helped by the Reserve Bank’s rate cuts in February and May. Lower repayments are giving families a little more breathing room, and this is flowing through to extra spending on travel, recreation and hospitality.

While many households remain cautious, the fact discretionary spending is picking up shows confidence is returning. It also suggests past interest rate cuts are starting to work their way through the economy, softening the squeeze from high rents and living costs.

Economic growth per person, known as per-capita GDP, has been soft in recent quarters but edged up 0.2% in the June quarter.

Chalmers said the outcome was “very encouraging, as some comparable economies such as Germany and Canada went backwards in the quarter”.

Markets expect the Reserve Bank to cut interest rates again, with at least one more cut possible later this year if the economy does not strengthen much further and inflation stays under control.

Running down savings

Perhaps the most telling number in the economic release is the household saving rate, which fell from 5.2% in March to 4.2% in June. This was because spending jumped 1.5%, while disposable income rose only 0.6%.

Although wages were stronger, income growth slowed as insurance payouts and social benefits eased after the cyclone-related spike earlier in the year.

Households had to dip into savings to keep spending — a sign they are feeling resilient enough to spend rather than hold back.

The global backdrop

Global conditions remain difficult and pose clear risks for Australia’s outlook. China’s slowdown, driven by a weak property sector and soft domestic demand, continues to weigh on Australia’s export outlook, while trade tensions add further uncertainty.

The United States has stayed relatively resilient, but Europe remains stuck in stagnation. For a small, open economy like Australia’s, these headwinds highlight the need for caution, as global demand and financial conditions will heavily influence growth prospects.

What it all means

Overall, the picture looks brighter than in recent quarters.

Families are still under pressure, yet the rise in spending suggests confidence is returning and lower interest rates are starting to help. For policymakers, the challenge is to keep the recovery moving without reigniting inflation. With exports and government demand steady, and households showing signs of life, there is now more reason to be hopeful about the months ahead.

Stella Huangfu, Associate Professor, School of Economics, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Every day, when Australians tap their card at a cafe checkout or hit pay on an online order, there’s often an unpredictable, frustrating extra cost: the card surcharge.

Vibhu Arya, University of Technology Sydney; Renu Agarwal, University of Technology Sydney, and Wen Helena Li, University of Technology Sydney

Australians pay more than $1.2 billion every year in card surcharges, with 88% of our payments still made using cards.

That high cost is why the Reserve Bank is working on how to reduce card surcharges. A final decision is due later this year.

Yet if you visit many parts of Asia, Africa or South America, you’ll discover there are cheaper alternatives to paying by card – saving money for shoppers and businesses.

Global growth in real-time payments

Real-time payments, sometimes also known as instant or fast payments, move money between bank accounts instantly. It’s often as simple as scanning a QR code, or using a mobile number or email.

For example, you place a coffee order – but instead of tapping a bank card, you use your phone to scan a QR code at the counter to pay.

Crucially for the cafe, the money lands instantly into their account. In contrast, tap to pay cards funds usually land in a business’s account a day or two later.

In countries as diverse as India, Brazil, China, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Nigeria, Bangladesh and advanced economies such as Hong Kong and Singapore, real-time payments for everyday purchases are already common.

For consumers, it’s fee-free. And particularly for small businesses, it’s much cheaper than cards.

The reason it’s cheaper is simple: there are no intermediaries taking a share of fees, with the money moving directly between two bank accounts.

How it’s done worldwide

In India, the most popular way to pay is UPI, with more than 600 million real-time transactions a day.

In China, the most popular ways to pay are Alipay and Wechat wallets, which run on QR codes linked to the user’s bank accounts. But the underlying infrastructure is via real-time payments. China has more than 1 billion real-time transactions a day.

In Brazil, the most popular way to pay is PIX, with more than 75 million transactions a day. It’s free for consumers – and up to ten times cheaper for businesses than cards.

In Singapore, PayNow remains a popular way to pay, free for both consumers and businesses.

Yet in other countries, including Australia, New Zealand, the United States and United Kingdom, card payments still dominate.

Can Australians make real-time payments now?

Yes – but we’re doing it far less than we could.

You can make instant transfers through PayID and pre-approved debits via PayTo.

PayID works by letting you use your mobile number, email address, Australian Business Number (ABN) or organisation identifier to receive fast payments to your bank account. You can have multiple PayIDs, each linked to a different account.

PayTo is different. It works via one-time authorisation, where the consumer allows a business to draw from their account, up to a certain amount and time period. Think of it as real-time payments for recurring payments, such as Spotify, Netflix or gym memberships.

Australia has more than 27 million registered PayIDs, with more than 5 million daily transactions.

How to save Australians millions a year

With PayID and PayTo, money lands in a business’s account instantly. The cost is tiny, projected to fall to four cents a transaction by this year.

Every day, Australians make roughly 45 million card transactions. If even some of those transactions shifted to PayID or PayTo, small businesses could save millions in fees – and customers would be spared a big share of that $1.2 billion in card surcharges.

However, a 2025 Nielsen/Westpac survey found that while 99% of Australian business leaders recognised the need to move to real-time payments, only 25% had started that transition.

Why are real-time payments part of daily life in some countries, but not here? Preliminary research points to one factor above all: the central bank’s role. In Australia’s case, that would mean the Reserve Bank stepping in to do more.

Instead of spending so much time and resources on card surcharges, the Reserve Bank should do more to boost the use of real-time payments.

Are real-time payments riskier?

Real-time payment QR codes overseas are secure, and businesses do not see or retain the customer’s phone number or email.

Unlike card payments, there is no risk of losing your card or card numbers. A payment can only be made via scanning a QR code and authorising it.

Of course, risks remain. Whether using a card or a real-time payment, being aware of the risks of fraud or scammers remains important.

The Australian Banking Association has recommended more Australians use PayID to protect themselves from scams or mistaken payments.

Cutting costs for shoppers and business

Australian small businesses currently get a raw deal. The Reserve Bank says they’re often charged between 1-2% on every transaction, around three times what the big chains pay.

No wonder many end up adding surcharges to cover their costs.

We already have the tools to make real-time payments an option for everyday shopping. Unlike overseas, that option is still rarely offered at the checkout.

A faster, cheaper way to pay than with cards is possible. It’s time to use it.

Vibhu Arya, PhD Student, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney; Renu Agarwal, Professor, Strategy, Operations and Supply Chain Management, University of Technology Sydney, and Wen Helena Li, Senior Lecturer, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

A front page story in The Financial Times in the UK last week portrayed one of the great industrial relations cockups of recent times, all brought about by a button inadvertently pushed on a dreaded email! Here’s what happened.

ANZ, one of our big four banks, is having an absolute shocker after an accidental email was sent out informing staff members (many who were senior managers) that they’d be sacked. This was a front page story in The Financial Times in the UK last week and was portrayed as one of the great industrial relations cockups of recent times.

And it looks like this IR disaster isn’t getting any better, with the AFR reporting that the bosses of the bank put on a town hall meeting with staff that seemingly posed more questions than were answered.

While details of how many jobs will go are yet to be revealed, the Financial Sector Union has been told that five restructuring or job-cutting proposals were possible, affecting 200 jobs. But it could be worse. The AFR’s Angira Bharadwaj informs us: “Brokers have suggested that the bank could cut up to 2,000 jobs from its 42,400 global workforces.”

Insiders (who wouldn’t be named) have said 30% to 40% of the retail and technology divisions of the business could be in for the chop.

Like a lot of businesses, for a long time, inefficiencies within the organisation have been lived with. Bank experts, who advise stockbrokers and fund managers, say 2,000 jobs could easily go and some tasks performed by people will be replaced by AI solutions.

All this upheaval comes as ANZ learns to live with a new CEO, Nuno Matos, who was shipped in from the British founded bank HSBC. Apart from improving ANZ’s productivity and profit, Matos has to bed down the integration of Suncorp’s banking business bought last year.

Since April 9, ANZ’s share price has spiked from $26.50 to $33.57 — a 26% gain that suggests people ‘in the know’ saw job-cutting and profit-boosting decisions were on the way.

ANZ

Not surprisingly in the world of money, this PR nightmare inadvertently informing people by email that they could be sacked, hasn’t hurt the bank’s share price.

Cost savings work in the first instance to boost profit. Undoubtedly, AI will be used to fill holes created by fewer staff members. However, if ANZ becomes known as a customer-unfriendly organisation because of less face-to-face encounters thanks to robots or chatbots, there could be a stampede out of the bank.

In this brave new world we live in, all banks will be doing the same thing! On this very point, Westpac’s CEO Anthony Miller is expected to wave 1,500 staff members goodbye.

This is a sign of the AI times we live in, so we need to get used to it.

There have been a number of wins with this recent July election. I’ve also needed to revise a few previously held views!

The Tasmanian Liberal Party has now won five successive state general elections for which the Saturday polling dates were 15 March 2014, 3 March 2018, 1 May 2021, 23 March 2024 and 19 July 2025. On each occasion the Liberal Party leader became the Premier or was confirmed as such, Will Hodgman (2014-20) Peter Gutwein (2020-22) and Jeremy Rockliff (since April 2022).

On each election night, the leader claimed victory for his party, but the 2025 election differed from the others in that the Labor leader did not concede defeat. For that reason, I think historians will say that the recent election was not determined on polling day (Saturday 19 July): it was determined on Tuesday 19 August when the House of Assembly met and, by a vote of 24 to 10 determined that Rockliff should remain Premier.
Some of the winners and losers from this election will be assessed differently by different political analysts. For my part there are four winners, the Liberal Party, Jeremy Rockliff, the Hare-Clark electoral system and Tasmania’s refusal to go along with the current fad

of supposing that fixing the term of parliament is a genuine democratic reform. The four losers are the Labor Party, Dean Winter, party-list forms of proportional representation (PR) and fixed-term parliaments.
It is true that the terms of parliament for states/territories on the Australian mainland are fixed at four years but there are two lower houses where proposed fixing has been rejected. They are the federal House of Representatives and the Tasmanian House of Assembly. Let me, therefore, consider what would have happened if Tasmania’s term had been fixed at four years.
In the first week of June 2025, I read a story in The Australian newspaper by its Tasmanian correspondent, Matthew Denholm. Its headline was “Premier at mercy of House result”. It began with the assertion that “Tasmanian Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff appears to have lost the confidence of the House of Assembly.” As events unfolded, it transpired that Rockliff did, indeed, lose that confidence. Labor’s leader Dean Winter moved a motion of no confidence in Rockliff which was carried by 18 votes to 17.

Now suppose Tasmania’s lower house had a fixed term of four years. Rockliff would have been replaced as Premier, and the parliamentary term would have proceeded with someone else leading the state. That is what happened when the energetic reformist Nick Greiner was kicked out of the office of NSW Premier in June 1992. His lacklustre successor John Fahey kept the Liberals in office, but his government was defeated in March 1995.

In Tasmania, by contrast, the state’s constitution gave Rockliff the opportunity to go to the Governor, Barbara Baker, and seek a dissolution. She gave it to him. We now know that Rockliff took his opponents to the cleaners, so to speak, and prevailed. What had been an 18-17 vote against him in early June became a 24-10 vote in his favour in late August. That to me is democracy. That is why I do not support any further fixing of parliamentary terms in Australia.

Back on Thursday 3 July, there was published in Switzer Daily an article by me titled “Tasmanian election on 19 July impossible to predict”. It included this paragraph: “I have been through all the records of early elections in every Australian jurisdiction and discover that this is the second earliest in my lifetime. Back when I was a schoolboy there was a Queensland state election on 19 May 1956. The then Labor split caused an early election to be held on 3 August 1957. The present Tasmanian dates are 23 March 2024 for the most recent election and 19 July 2025 for the current one. The big difference is that the 1957 Queensland election was expected to create stability - in which it fully succeeded. By contrast, the current Tasmanian situation is a mess.”

The view that Tasmania is in a semi-permanent political mess was the conventional view at the time I wrote those words. I now wish to revise them. This early election has pulled the state out of any perceived mess. It has done so through the skill of Jeremy Rockliff combined with his ability to call this early election – an ability that was denied to Nick Greiner. Historians, therefore, will record that Rockliff has been greatly under-estimated just as Greiner has been greatly over-estimated.

There is another opinion of mine that I now wish to revise. In my Switzer Daily article published on Thursday 14 August “How the House was won: Tasmania finalises its election results” (LUKE, show in blue) I repeated a prediction I had made that Rockliff would not still be Premier in April 2026. I now cancel that. I can now see no reason why Rockliff would not still be Premier for the full four years of this parliamentary term. He could easily be Premier in April 2029 when he will celebrate seven years of his holding that office.

The fourth winner from this election is the Hare-Clark electoral system. In place continuously since 1909 I have often described it as the original and the best PR system in the world. So, I sum up the result by saying that the biggest party in votes, the Liberal Party, has emerged with 40% of the votes and 40% of the seats and it will be a stable minority government. The second biggest party in votes is Labor, and it is still the official Opposition. Labor secured 26% of the votes and 29 per cent of the seats while the Greens have won 14% of the votes and 14% of the seats. In addition, there is now in the House of Assembly a member of the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party – Carlo Di Falco. He has secured one of the seven seats in the rural division of Lyons.

I wrote above that “the four losers are the Labor Party, Dean Winter, party list forms of PR and fixed term parliaments”. Back in 1906 the Tasmanian Labor party secured only 26% to of the vote before taking off into being the normal majority party. In 1909 it secured 39% – and the rest is history. Labor is now back to 26% of the vote, having learnt that it is most unwise to bring on a no confidence vote from such a weak position of having only ten members in a lower house of 35. Consequently, Winter has lost his post as Leader of the Opposition, having been replaced by Josh Willie.

Finally, why do I mention party-list forms of PR? Essentially my take on PR is that proportional representation is a concept which is neither good nor bad. It takes different forms, some good, some bad. Tasmania has a good form – as we have now learnt again. The world’s worst form of PR is that by which the Israeli Knesset is elected. It has produced bad government as the whole world now fully understands.

Australian home prices surged to fresh record highs in August, driven by rising buyer demand, constrained supply, and the Reserve Bank’s rate-cutting cycle—marking the seventh consecutive monthly gain for national housing values.

According to housing analytics firm Cotality, national home prices rose 0.72% in August—the strongest monthly increase since May 2024—pushing the median national dwelling value to $848,858. The lift in August outpaced July’s 0.55% gain and took annual growth to a five-month high of 4.1%, up from 3.78% in July.

Capital cities lead the charge

Across the combined capital cities, prices rose 0.79% in August to a median of $932,038, also the fastest monthly gain since May 2024. While this was supported by growth in every city except Hobart, the mid-tier capitals are clearly driving momentum.

• Brisbane led the gains with a 1.2% increase, pushing dwelling values 7.9% higher over the year.

• Perth (up 1.1%) and Darwin (up 1.0%) also continued to show outsized strength, fuelled by low stock, high rental yields and relatively better affordability.

• Adelaide rose 0.9%, maintaining its status as a resilient performer in the current cycle.

 

Meanwhile, the country’s two largest cities recorded more modest growth:

• Sydney home values rose 0.8%, buoyed by improved borrowing capacity following the RBA’s mid-August rate cut.

• Melbourne, by contrast, managed only a 0.3% gain—making it the national laggard. Analysts point to higher investor tax burdens and weaker per capita income growth as factors weighing on the city’s performance.

 

Hobart was the only capital city to post a decline in August, with prices slipping 0.2%, continuing a subdued trend driven by softening demand and an unwinding of pandemic-era price growth.

 

Regional markets stay strong

Outside the capitals, regional Australia posted a 0.51% gain in August, taking prices 6.0% higher over the year to a median of $693,859. While overall performance was solid, the pace of growth varied widely by region.

The strongest monthly increases came from:

• South-East Tasmania (+2.1%)

• WA – Outback South (+2.0%)

• Regional WA (+1.0%)

• Queensland regional areas (+0.8%)

• Victoria regional areas (+0.6%)

 

At the same time, there were some clear pockets of weakness. Notable monthly declines occurred in:

• Regional NT – Outback (−0.8%)

• Southern Highlands & Shoalhaven, NSW (−0.8%)

• Melbourne – Inner South (−0.6%)

 

Over the 12-month period, price gains were especially pronounced in:

• WA’s Wheat Belt (+15.5%)

• Townsville, QLD (+15.2%)

 

Conversely, annual price falls were recorded in:

• Melbourne – Inner (−0.8%)

• North Sydney & Hornsby (−0.7%)

 

Supply squeeze, affordability shift

The ongoing imbalance between supply and demand continues to put upward pressure on prices. Total listing volumes fell again in August, now sitting 22.5% below the national 5-year average.

This shortage is most severe in:

• Brisbane

• Perth

• Adelaide

But now even Sydney and Melbourne, which previously had more balanced markets, are experiencing stock shortages—further contributing to rising prices.

The RBA’s three rate cuts in 2025 have clearly improved borrowing capacity. Paired with rising real wages and improved consumer confidence, these cuts are enabling more buyers to re-enter the market—especially first-home buyers and upgraders.

Rental market re-accelerates

The rental market showed renewed momentum in August, with advertised rents rising 0.5%—the fastest monthly gain since May 2024. Annual rent growth also ticked higher to 4.1%, following two straight months of reacceleration.

Low vacancy rates and population pressures continue to drive rental demand, particularly in cities with tight supply and limited new housing coming online. Cotality notes that “the re-acceleration in rental growth has been apparent through most of 2025.”

Building approvals fall short

New supply is not keeping pace with demand. The latest ABS figures show that building approvals fell 8.2% in July, sharply below market expectations.

• Detached house approvals rose 1.1% to 9,288

• Apartment & townhouse consents collapsed 22.3% to 5,943

 

This takes the annualised rate of approvals to 187,585, still well below the government’s 240,000/year target needed to hit its goal of 1.2 million new homes by 2029.

State-by-state breakdown (July):

• NSW: −24.6% (driven by a 38.2% collapse in multi-unit dwellings)

• QLD: +5.9%

• VIC: +0.7%

• WA: +11.8%

• TAS: +12.2%

• SA: −1.3%

The value of non-residential approvals also dropped sharply (−14.9%), while home renovation activity (alterations & additions) lifted modestly by 1.9%.

HIA economists suggest that demand is beginning to filter through to the new home market, and that building a home may become more attractive relative to buying established property—though capacity constraints remain a challenge.

What's next?

CBA economists continue to forecast national home prices will rise around 6% in 2025, supported by the RBA’s ongoing rate-cutting cycle, improving wages, and rising confidence. However, the bank warns that growth will likely be modest relative to past cycles due to affordability constraints and more gradual monetary policy easing.

At the same time, HIA economists suggest that stronger demand in the established home market is likely to spill into the new home market, as building a new home becomes a more attractive proposition.

 

^{IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND DISCLAIMER FOR RETAIL CLIENTS
This content is prepared, approved and distributed in Australia by Commonwealth Securities Limited ABN 60 067 254 399 AFSL 238814 (CommSec) a wholly owned but non-guaranteed subsidiary of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (the Bank) and a Market Participant of ASX Limited and Cboe Australia Pty Limited.  All information contained herein is provided on a factual or general advice basis and is not intended to be construed as an offer, solicitation or investment recommendation in any way.  It has been prepared without taking into account your individual objectives, financial situation or needs. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.  CommSec, the Bank, our employees and agents may receive a commission and / or fees from transactions and / or deal on their own account in any securities referred to in this communication and may make investment decisions that are inconsistent with the recommendations or views expressed within this communication.  Any comments, suggestions or views presented herein may differ from those expressed elsewhere by CommSec and / or the Bank. The content may not be used, distributed or reproduced without prior consent and any unauthorised use of the content may breach copyright provisions.  CommSec does not give any representation or warranty as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of any content including any third party sourced data, nor does it accept liability for any errors or omissions.  CommSec is not liable for any losses or damages arising out of the use of information contained in this communication. This communication is not intended to be distributed outside of Australia.}

Recent torrential rain disrupted several Sydney train lines, in what is becoming a familiar story for commuters. Almost one in five trains in New South Wales ran late over the past year, and floods in May also saw a temporary closure of the North Coast line.

Other states are faring little better. In Queensland, the rail line from Brisbane to Cairns was shut for weeks due to floods in 2022.

Over in Western Australia, summer heatwaves routinely force trains to crawl at reduced speeds to avoid track buckling. In Melbourne, a derailment in July shut down two major lines for a week, disrupting the daily commute for tens of thousands of people.

From city transit to cross-country freight, Australia’s rail system is straining as the infrastructure ages and climate extremes grow more intense and frequent.

Old assets meet extreme weather

Much of Australia’s rail backbone was built decades ago. Some lines are more than a century old.

The Trans-Australian Railway, completed in 1917, still carries most freight between WA and the eastern states. It wasn’t designed for today’s rainfall.

In early 2022, extreme rain in outback South Australia washed out 300km of track. The event severed Perth’s land link for 24 days, costing about $320 million. Even in a normal year, the corridor is shut by flooding for an average of 40 days.

In February this year, North Queensland floods forced Queensland Rail to close sections of the North Coast Line, with nine bridges inundated.

In Perth, summer heat forces trains to slow as the steel of the tracks may warp. Speeds drop by 20km per hour at 39°C, and further at 41°C.

These heat restrictions have been imposed every summer for more than 30 years. As heatwaves intensify, so do the delays and the stress on equipment.

In 2024–25, only 82.5% of Sydney trains ran on time, well below the target of 92%. A backlog of almost 40,000 infrastructure defects, including worn rails, poor drainage and ageing signals, leaves the rail network vulnerable in storms.

Failures from commute to consumption

When a rail line fails, the impacts stretch from the morning commute to supermarket shelves.

Thousands of Sydney commuters have been hit with delays after flooding. Melbourne’s July derailment shut the Mernda and Hurstbridge lines, forcing 110,000 daily travellers to squeeze onto crowded replacement buses or find other travel options.

When the east–west line collapsed, WA briefly ran low on staples such as pasta, toilet paper and medicines.

The economic hit of these disruptions is large and recurrent. The Australasian Railway Association estimates major rail disruptions in NSW alone can cost up to $392 million a year in cancelled deliveries, shortages and repairs.

Between late 2021 and early 2023, Australia’s largest freight operator recorded eight interstate corridor shutdowns of a week or more. Each closure sends shockwaves through supply lines, pushing more freight onto highways, driving up costs, and exposing the fragility of a system where one washed-out bridge or buckled track can break a whole logistic chain.

A fragmented system with no-one at the helm

When Australia federated in 1901, railways were left under state control. The legacy has been a patchwork of networks with different rail gauges, standards and rules that didn’t line up at the borders.

Despite a century of effort, the Australian rail industry remains hampered by a pre-federation legacy of fragmentation. We have 29 separate rail networks, each with different standards, codes and rule books, and varied technologies and processes for building, operating and accessing the infrastructure.

A recent review of Australian rail operations found that overlapping agencies make it unclear who is accountable for maintenance. Repairs are often delayed, and nobody wants to take responsibility for failures.

Infrastructure Australia, the nation’s independent adviser on infrastructure, has likewise deemed the lack of resilience across transport corridors a nationally significant problem requiring coordinated, cross-jurisdictional action.

A national plan?

So what can be done? Experts and industry bodies such as the Australasian Railway Association (ARA) point to a two-pronged solution: modernise the infrastructure and modernise the governance.

On the infrastructure side, there are positive moves. The federal government has committed new funding, more than $1 billion announced in 2024, to make the national rail network more resilient and reliable.

But more is needed. Industry voices are calling for a concerted, long-term program to “identify, fund and deliver” upgrades nationwide to improve rail lines’ redundancy, reliability and climate resilience. In practice, that means strengthening bridges, raising or rerouting tracks in flood-prone areas, deploying digital signalling and safety systems with IoT monitoring, and building alternative routes to keep services running when a line fails.

Equally important is rethinking governance. A resilient rail system needs a national strategy and better coordination across states.

The ARA has called for a National Freight Resilience Plan to ensure a consistent response to major disruptions. This could be expanded into a broader plan backed by federal leadership. A federal plan might mandate climate-adaptation standards for all federally funded projects and break down state silos.

The benefit? A more reliable, resilient, safer and smoother rail system for all of us.

Haoning Xi, Lecturer (Assistant Professor), Newcastle Business School, University of Newcastle

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

I’m jetting home from a business trip that ended in London’s Corinthia Hotel that’s smack in the middle of Whitehall and adjacent to Old Scotland Yard. In 1755, Dr Samuel Johson said “When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life” and that was from a guy who spent a big chunk of his life compiling the English Dictionary.

The government’s trial has found age-assurance for its under-16 social media ban can be done effectively and protect privacy but there is not a one-size-fits-all model.

The report, from an independent company and released in full, also warns continued vigilance is needed on privacy and other issues.

It found some providers, in the absence of guidance, were collecting too much data, over-anticipating what regulators would require.

The ban on under 16s having their own social media accounts has been passed by parliament and comes into effect in December. It covers a wide range of platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X, and YouTube (which was recently added).

The measure is world-leading, and has been very controversial. One issue has been the degree of likely reliability of age verification.

The trial looked at various age assurance methods including AI, facial analysis, parental consent and identity documents. The methods were judged on accuracy, usability and privacy grounds.

More than 60 technologies were examined from 48 age assurance vendors.

The report concluded age assurance systems “can be private, robust and effective”. Moreover there was “a plethora” of choices available for providers, and no substantial technological limitations.

“But we did not find a single ubiquitous solution that would suit all use cases, nor did we find solutions that were guaranteed to be effective in all deployments.” Instead, there was “a rich and rapidly evolving range of services which can be tailored and effective depending on each specified context of use”.

The age assurance service sector was “vibrant, creative and innovative”, according to the report, with “a pipeline of new technologies”.

It had a robust understanding of the handling of personal information and a strong commitment to privacy.

But the trial found opportunities for technological improvements, including ease of use.

On parental control systems, the trial found these could be effective.

“But they serve different purposes. Parental control systems are pre-configured and ongoing but they may fail to adapt to the evolving capacities of children including potential risks to their digital privacy as they grow and mature, particularly through adolescence.

"Parental consent mechanisms prompt active engagement between children and their parents at key decision points, potentially supporting informed access.”

The trial found while the assurance systems were generally secure, the rapidly evolving threat environment meant they could not be considered infallible.

They needed continual monitoring, improvement and attention to compliance with privacy requirements.

Also, “We found some concerning evidence that in the absence of specific guidance, service providers were apparently over-anticipating the eventual needs of regulators about providing personal information for future investigations.

"Some providers were found to be building tools to enable regulators, law enforcement or Coroners to retrace the actions taken by individuals to verify their age which could lead to increased risk of privacy breaches, due to unnecessary and disproportionate collection and retention of data.”

Communications Minister Anika Wells said: “While there’s no one-size-fits-all solution to age assurance, this trial shows there are many effective options and importantly that user privacy can be safeguarded”.

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

We've stood back and watched the rocket ride that Life360 shares have been on over the last 12 months. But can that ride continue, or have they found their apex?

The company's August earnings report saw Life360 deliver an impressive quarter, posting adjusted earnings of 8 cents per share. A remarkable turnaround from the 15-cent loss in the same quarter last year. Even more impressive, they beat analyst expectations, who had predicted a 1-cent loss.

Revenue growth was equally strong, jumping 36% to $115.38 million, comfortably exceeding the $109.75 million analysts had forecast. The company turned a quarterly net profit of $7.01 million, demonstrating that Life360 has a handle on how it's monetising its user base.

Almost 30 days post that earnings report and the stock has once again pulled off a massive jump, up 19% month-on-month. It's currently trading at $US90.45 as of Friday close (technically Saturday, as it trades on the Nasdaq, after all). That puts its 12 month performance up by a whopping 133%. If you'd invested $10,000 in Life360 on this day last year, you'd have doubled your money and then some, up to almost $23,000.

Time to take some profits?

The shine isn't necessarily off the apple for the stock, but investors seem to have spent the last week of August taking some value off the table and back into their pockets.

At least, that's what it looks like when you see the candles for the last week that show a slightly higher than average amount of selling action. Plus, there's selling happening at the top end of Life360 just last week, with SEC filings showing CEO Lauren Antonoff parting with around 4,500 of her own Life360 shares at a tidy price of $90, picking up a hair over $400,000 as a result. She wasn't alone in making her sell orders, either: Antonoff is one of three Life360 directors who sold chunks of their stock in the last few weeks.

What do the analysts say?

Analysts also seem to agree on the stock's current valuation ceiling. Seven analysts currently track Life360, with all maintaining "buy" ratings - a unanimous vote of confidence. The breakdown shows 7 "strong buy" or "buy" recommendations, with zero "hold" or "sell" ratings.

But while all keep it in the buy column, they all seem to agree that between $US85 and $US100 is where the stock should be priced right now.

Is Life360 up to the challenge?

I've opined before that Life360 is a business that - candidly - I don't really get. It's a product people are really enjoying, but for me, it's nothing that isn't already done for free by first-party manufacturers like Apple and Google. And when they're your competition, typically your future isn't as bright as Life360's seems to be! 

Now its constant challenge is to monetise a product that already competes against these huge loss leaders that are constantly innovating while still maintaining a price of $0. Apple's Find My network continues to expand, Google's family safety features become more sophisticated, and both offer these services bundled with their ecosystem products. 

Life360's success has been built on being first to market with a comprehensive family tracking solution, but maintaining pricing power against free alternatives from tech giants requires a lot of moxy. Its revenue growth is impressive, but sustaining that pace becomes increasingly difficult when the competition is free.

It's easy to look at a stock that has gained massive amounts of positive ground and say that it can't possibly continue. Past performance is never a guarantee of future returns, and this is by no means financial advice, but a few factors are starting to come together that show Life360 may have found itself pretty happy at this $90 number. At least until its next earnings in November when prices will no doubt ignite the rocket ship all over again.

Whether that rocket ship launches toward new highs or finds itself constrained by competitive pressures and valuation reality remains the key question for Life360 investors in the months ahead.

From housing prices and the monthly inflation gauge to GDP, trade and a wall of US labour data, this week is loaded with potential market catalysts. Here’s what to watch on your investor calendar for the week beginning Sunday 31 August 2025.

As usual, this info comes to us from the experts at CommSec.

Sunday 31 August

Overseas: China PMIs (Aug.) — manufacturing is expected to ease to 49.5 from 49.8.

Monday 1 September

Australia: Home value index (Aug.) — home prices are expected to lift 0.7%.
Melbourne Institute inflation gauge (Aug.) — July’s headline gauge rose 0.9%.
ANZ-Indeed job ads (Aug.) — job ads fell 1% in July.
Inventories & company profits (Q2) — inventories could fall 0.5% with profits down 5%.
Building approvals (July) — the value of approvals could slip 5%.

Overseas: US financial markets closed for the Labor Day public holiday.

Tuesday 2 September

Australia: Balance of payments (Q2) — a current account deficit of $1.6 billion is tipped.

United States: ISM manufacturing (Aug.) — tipped to lift from 48.0 to 50.5.
Construction spending (July) — spending could inch up 0.1%.

Wednesday 3 September

Australia: RBA Governor Michele Bullock speaks (Shann Memorial Lecture, Perth).
Economic growth (GDP, Q2) — quarterly growth of 0.4% is expected.

United States: Factory orders (July) — orders could drop 1.4%.
Federal Reserve Beige Book — economic conditions across districts.
JOLTS job openings (July) — openings could dip to 7.3 million.

Thursday 4 September

Australia: International goods trade (July) — a surplus of $5.5 billion is expected.
Monthly household spending indicator (July) — spending could jump 0.7%.
RBA Deputy Governor Andrew Hauser speaks (Reuters interview).

United States: ADP employment (Aug.) — around 60,000 private payrolls could be added.
ISM services (Aug.) — expected to edge up from 50.1 to 50.5.
Trade balance (July) — deficit estimated at US$62.6 billion.
Challenger job cuts (Aug.) — firms could announce about 30,000 layoffs.

Friday 5 September

United States: Nonfarm payrolls (Aug.) — the economy could add 300,000 jobs.

Key themes to watch

• Australia’s growth pulse: Q2 GDP (0.4% q/q expected) alongside home prices, approvals and spending.
• RBA watch: Dual speeches (Governor Bullock, Deputy Hauser) for any policy colour ahead of spring.
• China demand signal: August PMIs as a read-through for commodities and AUD.
• US “jobs week” + activity: ISM manufacturing/services, JOLTS, ADP, job cuts and Friday’s payrolls headline.

Check back next Monday for the latest investor calendar, only on Switzer.