Betashares Australia 200 ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P/ASX 200 Financials ex A-REIT ETF
Overlap is estimated from the funds' listed top holdings, not their full constituent lists. Where there are no shared listed holdings it is shown as not reliably estimable.
A200 (Australian Broad Market) and OZF (Thematic) provide different exposures. A200 tracks the Solactive Australia 200 Index and OZF tracks the S&P/ASX 200 Financials ex A-REIT Index. A200 has the lower management fee (0.04% vs 0.34% p.a.). Holdings overlap is approximately 34% estimated (top 30 holdings).
Betashares Australia 200 ETF
BetaShares
State Street SPDR S&P/ASX 200 Financials ex A-REIT ETF
State Street (SPDR)
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
There is no single "better" fund here - which suits you depends on your goals. The clearest differences between A200 and OZF:
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, OZF 30); 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 OZF approximately 3.61%; OZF 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: top 30 holdings.
Top 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures.
A200 top holdings
OZF top holdings
Based on each fund's most recently published sector and geographic weightings; figures are approximate. Full breakdowns are shown below.
A200 sectors
OZF sectors
A200 geography
OZF geography
There is no single right choice between A200 and OZF - it depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. The key differences between the two funds are summarised near the top of this page, with the full side-by-side data below.
A200 and OZF have approximately 34% estimated holdings overlap (top 30 holdings). This is considered low overlap, estimated from listed top holdings rather than the full constituent lists.
A200 has the lower management fee. A200 charges 0.04% per year ($4 per year on a $10,000 investment) and OZF charges 0.34% per year ($34 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $30 per year per $10,000 invested.
A200 (Betashares Australia 200 ETF) manages approximately $9.5B and OZF (State Street SPDR S&P/ASX 200 Financials ex A-REIT ETF) manages approximately $44.86M. 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 34% estimated holdings overlap the two funds hold mostly different companies, so they can be more complementary. 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 OZF charges 0.34%, so A200 has the lower management fee, and they have approximately 34% 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 →OZF 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 →