Betashares Australia 200 ETF vs VanEck Australian Equal Weight ETF
Overlap is calculated from each fund's full published holdings list. Where there are no shared listed holdings it is shown as not reliably estimable.
A200 tracks the 200 largest ASX-listed companies by market capitalisation, giving significant weight to the major banks and miners.
Betashares Australia 200 ETF
BetaShares
VanEck Australian Equal Weight ETF
VanEck
Comparison scores reflect how each ETF compares to the other on these specific dimensions only. They are not absolute ratings or recommendations.
Key differences at a glance
Which of A200 and MVW fits depends on your objectives, not on one being superior. Where the two funds differ most:
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
A200 has the lower management fee - the one objective "cheaper" axis.
A200 is the larger fund. Larger is not inherently better, but greater scale can support tighter spreads and lower closure risk.
A200 spreads exposure across more holdings (A200 201, MVW 75); the other is more concentrated. Neither is inherently better - it depends on whether you want breadth or a focused tilt.
A200 distributes approximately 3.3% and MVW approximately 3.2%; A200 carries the higher estimated distribution yield. A higher yield may suit an income focus; a lower one may suit a growth or tax-efficiency focus. Yields are estimates and are not guaranteed; past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
Green highlights the factually lower fee or higher scale/income figure. Performance is never highlighted. Data from issuer disclosures, reviewed quarterly.
Yield figures are estimates based on recent distributions and may vary. Past distributions are not a reliable indicator of future distributions.
Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
Top shared holdings ranked by overlap contribution, the smaller of each company's weight in the two funds. Basis: full holdings data.
Top 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures.
A200 top holdings
MVW top holdings
Based on each fund's most recently published sector and geographic weightings; figures are approximate. Full breakdowns are shown below.
A200 sectors
MVW sectors
A200 geography
MVW geography
A200 tracks the 200 largest ASX-listed companies by market capitalisation, giving significant weight to the major banks and miners. MVW uses an equal-weight methodology, spreading exposure more evenly across its holdings and reducing concentration in any single stock or sector. This structural difference means the two ETFs behave differently during periods of sector rotation.
Investors weighing market-cap concentration in Australian shares against equal-weight diversification.
A200 and MVW have approximately 47% holdings overlap, based on each fund's full published holdings list. This is considered moderate overlap.
A200 has the lower management fee. A200 charges 0.04% per year ($4 per year on a $10,000 investment) and MVW charges 0.35% per year ($35 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $31 per year per $10,000 invested.
A200 (Betashares Australia 200 ETF) manages approximately $9.5B and MVW (VanEck Australian Equal Weight ETF) manages approximately $3.2B. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee.
You can hold both, but with approximately 47% estimated holdings overlap the two funds share a moderate proportion of holdings, so there is some duplicated exposure. Whether that suits you depends on your own objectives.
There is no universally right choice. It depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. A200 charges 0.04% and MVW charges 0.35%, so A200 has the lower management fee, and they have approximately 47% estimated holdings overlap. Compare their fees, holdings and sectors above and consider each fund's Product Disclosure Statement and Target Market Determination.
General information only. This comparison and the ETFLens tools on this page provide general information about two exchange-traded funds and do not take into account your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not personal financial product or investment advice. ETFLens does not hold an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL). Holdings overlap is calculated from each fund's published holdings (full lists where the issuer publishes one, listed top holdings otherwise), and fee data is sourced from fund manager PDS documents and updated quarterly. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns. Consider each fund's Product Disclosure Statement (PDS) and Target Market Determination (TMD), and seek advice from a registered tax agent or licensed financial adviser, before making investment decisions.
Check your portfolio overlap
See how these ETFs interact with your other holdings.
Open overlap checker →Build your portfolio
ProModel a portfolio with these ETFs and see projected fees and income.
Build a portfolio →View full ETF profiles
Holdings, fees, sectors and distributions for each fund.
A200 full profile →MVW full profile →A200 in-depth review →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →