VanEck China New Economy ETF vs Vanguard MSCI Index International Shares ETF
These ETFs do not share enough listed holdings to estimate overlap. General information only.
CNEW may suit investors who prefer larger, more established funds. VGS may suit investors who prefer larger, more established funds.
Scored across Cost, Scale, Diversification, Income and Performance. General information only, not financial advice.
See full breakdown ↓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.
VanEck China New Economy ETF
VanEck
Vanguard MSCI Index International Shares ETF
Vanguard
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.
CNEW and VGS are both Global Broad Market ETFs: CNEW tracks the and VGS tracks the MSCI World ex-Australia (with net dividends reinvested) in AUD. VGS has the lower management fee (0.18% vs 0.95% p.a.). A holdings overlap is not reliably estimable for this pair. General information only, not financial advice.
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
CNEW charges 0.95% p.a. and VGS charges 0.18% p.a.; the lower fee leads on cost.
CNEW manages $96.27M and VGS manages $15.5B; the larger fund leads on scale, which can support tighter spreads.
CNEW holds 121 positions and VGS holds 1,252; the fund with broader holdings leads on diversification.
CNEW distributes approximately 0.87% (Quarterly) and VGS approximately 1.6% (Quarterly); the higher distribution yield leads on income.
Over the compared period CNEW returned 2.6% and VGS returned 12.8%. 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 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures. General information only.
CNEW top holdings
VGS top holdings
Sector weights for CNEWare approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
CNEW sectors
VGS sectors
Geographic weights for CNEWare approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
CNEW geography
VGS geography
CNEW scores 2.4/10 and VGS scores 8.2/10 on this comparison. VGS has the higher overall comparison score.
CNEW may suit investors who: investors who prefer larger, more established funds.
VGS may suit investors who: investors who prefer larger, more established funds.
CNEW and VGS do not share enough listed top holdings to reliably estimate a holdings overlap. Compare their fees, holdings and sectors on this page. General information only, not financial advice.
VGS has the lower management fee. CNEW charges 0.95% per year ($95 per year on a $10,000 investment) and VGS charges 0.18% per year ($18 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $77 per year per $10,000 invested. General information only, not financial advice.
CNEW (VanEck China New Economy ETF) manages approximately $96.27M and VGS (Vanguard MSCI Index International Shares ETF) manages approximately $15.5B. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee. General information only, not financial advice.
CNEW and VGS do not share enough listed top holdings to estimate overlap, so whether holding both duplicates your exposure depends on their full constituent lists. General information only, not financial advice.
There is no universally right choice. It depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. CNEW charges 0.95% and VGS charges 0.18%, so VGS 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, 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 →View full ETF profiles
Holdings, fees, sectors and distributions for each fund.
CNEW full profile →VGS full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →