Global X Australia 300 ETF vs iShares Core S&P/ASX 200 ETF
General information only, not financial advice.
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.
Global X Australia 300 ETF
Global X
iShares Core S&P/ASX 200 ETF
BlackRock (iShares)
Comparison scores reflect how each ETF compares to the other on these specific dimensions only. They are not absolute ratings or recommendations. General information only, not financial advice.
A300 and IOZ are near-identical Australian Broad Market ETFs, with approximately 95% (full holdings data) holdings overlap. A300 has the lower management fee (0.04% vs 0.05% p.a.). There is limited reason to hold both, as the second fund adds little new exposure. General information only, not financial advice.
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
A300 charges 0.04% p.a. and IOZ charges 0.05% p.a.; the lower fee leads on cost.
A300 manages $10.66M and IOZ manages $8.4B; the larger fund leads on scale, which can support tighter spreads.
A300 holds 298 positions and IOZ holds 205; the fund with broader holdings leads on diversification.
A300 distributes approximately 1.95% (Quarterly) and IOZ approximately 3.4% (Quarterly); the higher distribution yield leads on income.
Historical return data is not available for both funds, so this dimension is shown as neutral. 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. General information only.
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. General information only.
Top 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures. General information only.
A300 top holdings
IOZ top holdings
Sector weights for A300are approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
A300 sectors
IOZ sectors
Geographic weights for A300are approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
A300 geography
IOZ geography
A300 scores 5.9/10 and IOZ scores 7.7/10 on this comparison. IOZ has the higher overall comparison score.
A300 may suit investors who: cost-conscious investors who prioritise lower ongoing fees.
IOZ may suit investors who: cost-conscious investors who prioritise lower ongoing fees.
A300 and IOZ have approximately 95% holdings overlap, based on each fund's full published holdings list. This is considered high overlap. General information only, not financial advice.
A300 has the lower management fee. A300 charges 0.04% per year ($4 per year on a $10,000 investment) and IOZ charges 0.05% per year ($5 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $1 per year per $10,000 invested. General information only, not financial advice.
A300 (Global X Australia 300 ETF) manages approximately $10.66M and IOZ (iShares Core S&P/ASX 200 ETF) manages approximately $8.4B. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee. General information only, not financial advice.
You can hold both, but with approximately 95% estimated holdings overlap the two funds hold a high proportion of the same companies, so holding both means paying two sets of management fees on largely the same exposure. Whether that suits you depends on your own objectives. General information only, not financial advice.
There is no universally right choice. It depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. A300 charges 0.04% and IOZ charges 0.05%, so A300 has the lower management fee, and they have approximately 95% 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, not financial advice.
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 →Check the CGT cost of switching
ProBefore consolidating overlapping ETFs, model the capital gains tax impact with the ETF Switch Calculator.
Calculate CGT cost →View full ETF profiles
Holdings, fees, sectors and distributions for each fund.
A300 full profile →IOZ full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →