Global X Australia 300 ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P/ASX 200 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.
A300 and STW 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.
Global X Australia 300 ETF
Global X
State Street SPDR S&P/ASX 200 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 A300 and STW:
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
A300 has the lower management fee - the one objective "cheaper" axis.
STW is the larger fund. Larger is not inherently better, but greater scale can support tighter spreads and lower closure risk.
A300 spreads exposure across more holdings (A300 298, STW 202); the other is more concentrated. Neither is inherently better - it depends on whether you want breadth or a focused tilt.
A300 distributes approximately 1.95% and STW approximately 3.4%; STW 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; sector and geography figures for some funds are category-inferred estimates, clearly labelled on each fund's page.
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.
A300 top holdings
STW top holdings
Sector weights for A300are approximate, inferred from the fund's category.
A300 sectors
STW sectors
Geographic weights for A300are approximate, inferred from the fund's category.
A300 geography
STW geography
There is no single right choice between A300 and STW - 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.
A300 and STW have approximately 95% holdings overlap, based on each fund's full published holdings list. This is considered high overlap.
A300 has the lower management fee. A300 charges 0.04% per year ($4 per year on a $10,000 investment) and STW charges 0.05% per year ($5 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $1 per year per $10,000 invested.
A300 (Global X Australia 300 ETF) manages approximately $10.66M and STW (State Street SPDR S&P/ASX 200 ETF) manages approximately $6.4B. 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 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.
There is no universally right choice. It depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. A300 charges 0.04% and STW 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.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 →STW full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →