Betashares Climate Change Innovation ETF vs Betashares Global Cybersecurity ETF
ERTH may suit growth-oriented investors (noting past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns). HACK 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 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.
Betashares Climate Change Innovation ETF
BetaShares
Comparison Scorei
Betashares Global Cybersecurity ETF
BetaShares
Comparison Scorei
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.
ERTH scores 3.3/10 and HACK scores 5.1/10 on this comparison, with HACK leading on Income. ERTH may suit growth-oriented investors (noting past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns); HACK may suit investors who prefer larger, more established funds. General information only, not financial advice.
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
ERTH charges 0.65% p.a. and HACK charges 0.67% p.a.; the lower fee leads on cost.
ERTH manages $90.2M and HACK manages $1.4B; the larger fund leads on scale, which can support tighter spreads.
ERTH holds 100 positions and HACK holds 42; the fund with broader holdings leads on diversification.
ERTH distributes approximately 0.4% (Semi-annually) and HACK approximately 3.4% (Annually); 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.
| Field | ERTH | HACK |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | Betashares Climate Change Innovation ETF | Betashares Global Cybersecurity ETF |
| Provider | BetaShares | BetaShares |
| Asset class | Thematic | Thematic |
| Index tracked | Solactive Climate Change and Environmental Opportunities Index | Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index |
| Inception | 2021 | 2016 |
| Domicile | Australia | Australia |
| Exchange | ASX | ASX |
| Field | ERTH | HACK |
|---|---|---|
| Management fee (MER) | 0.65% p.a. | 0.67% p.a. |
| Est. annual cost on $10,000 | $65 | $67 |
| Est. annual cost on $50,000 | $325 | $335 |
| Est. annual cost on $100,000 | $650 | $670 |
| Field | ERTH | HACK |
|---|---|---|
| Fund size (AUM) | $90.2M | $1.4B |
| Number of holdings | 100 | 42 |
| Field | ERTH | HACK |
|---|---|---|
| Distribution yield | approximately 0.4% | approximately 3.4% |
| Franking | Not available | Not available |
| Payment frequency | Semi-annually | Annually |
| Est. annual income on $50,000 | approximately $200 | approximately $1,700 |
| Field | ERTH | HACK |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | Not available | -9.7% |
| 3-year p.a. | Not available | 16.1% |
| 5-year p.a. | Not available | 10.4% |
Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
| Field | ERTH | HACK |
|---|---|---|
| Holdings overlap | Not reliably estimable | Not reliably estimable |
| Currency hedged | No | No |
| Geographic focus | United States | United States |
| Top 3 sectors | Enabling Solutions, Green Transportation, Green Energy | Information Technology, Industrials, Communication Services |
ERTH top holdings
HACK top holdings
ERTH scores 3.3/10 and HACK scores 5.1/10 on this comparison. HACK has the higher overall comparison score.
ERTH may suit investors who: growth-oriented investors (noting past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns).
HACK may suit investors who: investors who prefer larger, more established funds.
This comparison is general information only and not personal financial advice. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns. ETFLens does not hold an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL). Consider your own objectives, financial situation and needs, or speak with a licensed financial adviser before making investment decisions.
ERTH and HACK 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.
ERTH has the lower management fee. ERTH charges 0.65% per year ($65 per year on a $10,000 investment) and HACK charges 0.67% per year ($67 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $2 per year per $10,000 invested. General information only, not financial advice.
ERTH (Betashares Climate Change Innovation ETF) manages approximately $90.2M and HACK (Betashares Global Cybersecurity ETF) manages approximately $1.4B. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee. General information only, not financial advice.
ERTH and HACK 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. ERTH charges 0.65% and HACK charges 0.67%, so ERTH 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 estimated from listed top holdings, not full constituent lists, 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.
Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison. General information only.
Compare other ETFs →