Key points (as at Q2 2026)
- VAS holds approximately 316 Australian companies with franking credits; IVV holds approximately 503 United States large caps (the S&P 500) and no franking.
- They share close to 0% of their holdings, so holding both adds diversification rather than doubling up.
- Fees: VAS 0.07% p.a., IVV 0.04% p.a.. VAS is concentrated in banks and miners; IVV is concentrated in technology.
- IVV is unhedged United States exposure; VAS carries no direct currency exposure. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
Last updated: Q2 2026. Figures are computed from ETFLens data as at Q2 2026, sourced from each issuer's published disclosure documents and reviewed quarterly.
"VAS or IVV?" is one of the most common questions Australian index investors ask, and it is usually framed as "Australian shares or United States shares?". Unlike many ETF head-to-heads, this one is not about two funds that overlap. VAS and IVV hold almost entirely different companies, so the real question is not "which one", it is "how much of each, if any, fits your plan?".
This comparison uses live ETFLens data to show what each fund holds, how little they overlap, and the trade-offs (franking, concentration and currency) that separate them. It does not tell you which to buy.
What each ETF actually holds
VAS tracks the S&P/ASX 300: approximately 316 Australian-listed companies, dominated by the large banks and miners. Its biggest positions are Commonwealth Bank of Australia (10.68%), BHP Group Limited (10.03%), Westpac Banking Corporation (4.84%). Because the Australian market is concentrated, financials make up approximately 33.7% of the fund and materials approximately 25.1% as at Q2 2026.
IVV tracks the S&P 500: approximately 503 of the largest United States companies. Its biggest positions are Nvidia (8.5%), Apple (6.88%), Microsoft (4.95%), and information technology alone is approximately 32.84% of the fund. Geographically it is 100% United States.
| Feature | VAS | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Index | S&P/ASX 300 | S&P 500 |
| Market | Australia | United States |
| Holdings | approximately 316 | approximately 503 |
| MER | 0.07% p.a. | 0.04% p.a. |
| Fund size | $24.3B | $13.4B |
| Distribution yield | approximately 3.3% | approximately 1.1% |
| Franking credits | Yes | Generally no |
| Distributions | Quarterly | Quarterly |
Distribution yields are historical, vary each period and are not guaranteed. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
The overlap question: these two barely touch
This is the point that sets VAS and IVV apart from most ETF pairs. Because VAS holds Australian companies and IVV holds United States companies, the two share close to 0% of their holdings as at Q2 2026. Where adding IVV on top of a global fund like VGS mostly increases a United States tilt you already have, adding IVV alongside VAS genuinely broadens a portfolio into a different market.
That makes VAS and IVV natural complements rather than substitutes. It also means the decision is less "which fund is better" and more "what split between home and the United States, if any, matches my objectives", a question that depends on your circumstances and that ETFLens cannot answer for you.
Check the overlap between VAS and IVV
The ETFLens overlap checker calculates the approximate proportion of holdings any two funds share, using live data. For VAS and IVV it confirms how little they duplicate.
Check VAS vs IVV overlap →Franking credits: the biggest structural difference
VAS holds Australian companies, many of which pay franked dividends, and it passes those franking credits through to unit-holders in its distributions. For some investors, franking credits are a meaningful part of the after-tax return from Australian shares. IVV holds United States companies, which sit outside the Australian franking system, so it generally passes through foreign income tax offsets instead of franking credits.
This is a structural difference, not a better-or-worse one, and how much it matters depends entirely on your own tax position, which ETFLens cannot assess. Our plain-English guide to franking credits and ETFs explains how the pass-through works, and the franking calculator puts rough figures on it. Tax depends on your individual circumstances; consider a registered tax agent.
Concentration: banks and miners vs technology
Both funds are concentrated, but in different ways. VAS reflects the shape of the Australian market: financials are approximately 33.7% of the fund and materials approximately 25.1%, so a large share of VAS rides on the banks and the big miners. IVV reflects the shape of the United States market: information technology is approximately 32.84%, so a large share of IVV rides on a handful of United States technology companies.
Neither concentration is inherently safer. They are exposed to different forces, Australian interest rates, credit and commodity prices on one side, and the United States technology cycle on the other. Holding both spreads a portfolio across those different drivers, which is part of why some investors pair them. Sector weights change over time and are shown as approximate figures as at Q2 2026.
Fees compared
VAS charges 0.07% p.a. and IVV charges 0.04% p.a., both among the lower MERs on the ASX. The table shows the approximate annual cost of each at three portfolio sizes (amount × MER ÷ 100).
| Investment | VAS (0.07%) | IVV (0.04%) |
|---|---|---|
| $10,000 | $7/year | $4/year |
| $50,000 | $35/year | $20/year |
| $100,000 | $70/year | $40/year |
The fee gap between them is small in dollar terms and is not the main decision here; the market each fund holds matters far more. The Fee Analyser models the long-run impact, and the full VAS vs IVV comparison shows both funds side by side.
Currency: unhedged US exposure vs domestic
IVV is unhedged, so its value in Australian dollars moves with the AUD/USD exchange rate as well as with United States share prices. When the Australian dollar falls against the United States dollar, unhedged United States holdings are worth more in Australian-dollar terms, and vice versa. VAS holds Australian companies priced in Australian dollars, so it carries no direct currency exposure.
Neither approach is better; they behave differently. An investor who specifically wants United States shares without the currency swing sometimes uses a hedged S&P 500 fund such as IHVV instead of IVV. The S&P 500 ETF Australia guide covers the hedged and unhedged options.
Historical returns (with the disclaimer that applies to every figure)
As at Q2 2026, ETFLens shows reported returns of approximately 10.1% (1yr), 9.4% p.a. (3yr) and 8.4% p.a. (5yr) for VAS, and approximately 16.4% (1yr), 17.2% p.a. (3yr) and 14.2% p.a. (5yr) for IVV. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
It would be a mistake to choose between the funds on these numbers. They cover a period in which United States large caps performed strongly, and the IVV figures include the effect of the AUD/USD exchange rate on an unhedged fund. A different period could look very different. ETFLens does not draw conclusions from past returns or project them forward.
How each fits a portfolio
Because they hold different markets, VAS and IVV are often used together rather than as rivals:
- VAS is commonly used as the Australian, home-market part of a portfolio, valued for its franking credits and its exposure to the domestic economy.
- IVV is commonly used as a deliberate United States allocation, either on its own or alongside a home-market fund, for exposure to the large United States companies that dominate global markets.
A common structure pairs an Australian fund with a broad global fund rather than a single-country United States fund, since a global fund such as VGS already contains most of the S&P 500 plus other developed markets. The VAS vs VGS and two-ETF portfolio guides cover that approach. Whether VAS, IVV, both, or a different mix suits you depends on your objectives and circumstances, which ETFLens cannot assess.
Who each may suit
ETFLens does not recommend funds. As a neutral, general description:
- VAS may suit investors who want broad Australian share exposure with franking credits and are comfortable with the concentration in banks and miners that the Australian market carries.
- IVV may suit investors who want low-cost exposure to large United States companies and accept both the technology concentration and the unhedged currency exposure that come with it.
Whether either is appropriate, and in what proportion, depends on your objectives, situation and needs, which ETFLens cannot assess. If you are still deciding how to get started, see our guide on how to invest in ETFs in Australia.
This article is general information only and not personal financial or tax advice. ETFLens does not hold an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL). Tax treatment, including franking credits, depends on your circumstances; consider a registered tax agent. Consider your own objectives, financial situation and needs, or speak with a licensed financial adviser before making investment decisions. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.