Betashares Australian Government Bond ETF vs Betashares Australian Cash Plus Active ETF
These ETFs invest in different asset classes (shares vs bonds). They are unlikely to share holdings.
Scored across Cost, Fund size, Holdings breadth and Income. Past performance is excluded.
See full breakdown ↓Overlap is estimated from the funds' listed top holdings, not their full constituent lists. These funds invest in different markets, so the expected overlap is approximately 0%.
Betashares Australian Government Bond ETF
BetaShares
Betashares Australian Cash Plus Active ETF
BetaShares
Comparison scores reflect how each ETF compares to the other on these specific dimensions only. They are not absolute ratings or recommendations.
AGVT and MMKT are both Bonds ETFs: AGVT tracks the Bloomberg AusBond Government 0+ Yr Index and MMKT tracks the . AGVT has the lower management fee (0.1% vs 0.18% p.a.). A holdings overlap is not reliably estimable for this pair.
Key differences at a glance
Which of AGVT and MMKT 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.
AGVT has the lower management fee - the one objective "cheaper" axis.
AGVT is the larger fund. Larger is not inherently better, but greater scale can support tighter spreads and lower closure risk.
AGVT spreads exposure across more holdings (AGVT 79, MMKT 0); the other is more concentrated. Neither is inherently better - it depends on whether you want breadth or a focused tilt.
AGVT distributes approximately 3.9% and MMKT approximately 4.04%; MMKT 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 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures.
AGVT top holdings
MMKT top holdings
Sector weights for MMKTare approximate, inferred from the fund's category.
AGVT sectors
MMKT sectors
Geographic weights for MMKTare approximate, inferred from the fund's category.
AGVT geography
MMKT geography
Choosing between AGVT and MMKT depends on your goals, time horizon and current holdings, not on one being the right answer for everyone. The main differences are summarised above, with the complete data below.
AGVT and MMKT do not share enough listed top holdings to reliably estimate a holdings overlap. Compare their fees, holdings and sectors on this page.
AGVT has the lower management fee. AGVT charges 0.1% per year ($10 per year on a $10,000 investment) and MMKT charges 0.18% per year ($18 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $8 per year per $10,000 invested.
AGVT (Betashares Australian Government Bond ETF) manages approximately $1.1B and MMKT (Betashares Australian Cash Plus Active ETF) manages approximately $623.27M. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee.
AGVT and MMKT do not share enough listed top holdings to estimate overlap, so whether holding both duplicates your exposure depends on their full constituent lists.
There is no universally right choice. It depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. AGVT charges 0.1% and MMKT charges 0.18%, so AGVT has the lower management fee. 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.
AGVT full profile →MMKT full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →