It’s well known that the federal government is no fan of industry superannuation funds.

If we ever had any doubt, Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton gave the game away last November after the government very reluctantly announced the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Financial Services Sector.

A benefit of the financial sector royal commission will be that industry super funds will face more scrutiny, given they have “union members and whatnot on the board”, opined the minister.

The request for the banking royal commission (as it’s known) to investigate superannuation funds is specifically designed to try to embarrass industry funds.

Again this week the government’s antipathy towards industry funds was in full view.

An internal dispute over investment strategy at Australia’s largest industry fund, Australian Super, is being played out in court.

Financial Services Minister Kelly O’Dwyer was quickly on the front foot.

“It is critical that thuggery and intimidation, which has long been a feature of the industrial landscape, is not adopted within the superannuation industry,” she said.

It’s against that background that the latest scorecard for superannuation fund performance has been released, and once again, industry funds leave the “retail” funds owned by banks and AMP in the shade.

The top 10 funds, over whatever period you choose, whether it be one month, one year, five years, 10 years or 15 years, are from the not-for-profit sector, which is dominated by industry funds.

It’s been like that since compulsory superannuation was introduced by the Keating Labor government in 1992.

That’s more than a quarter of a century of evidence that industry funds provide their members with better retirement outcomes than the bank and AMP-owned funds.