Franklin Australian Absolute Return Bond Fund - Active ETF vs Vanguard Australian Fixed Interest Index ETF
These ETFs invest in different asset classes (shares vs bonds). They are unlikely to share holdings. General information only.
FRAR may suit investors who prefer larger, more established funds. VAF may suit investors seeking broad market exposure.
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. These funds invest in different markets, so the expected overlap is approximately 0%.
Franklin Australian Absolute Return Bond Fund - Active ETF
Other
Vanguard Australian Fixed Interest Index 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.
FRAR and VAF are both Bonds ETFs: FRAR tracks the and VAF tracks the Bloomberg AusBond Composite 0+ Yr Index. VAF has the lower management fee (0.1% vs 0.5% 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.
FRAR charges 0.5% p.a. and VAF charges 0.1% p.a.; the lower fee leads on cost.
FRAR manages $714.51M and VAF manages $3.5B; the larger fund leads on scale, which can support tighter spreads.
FRAR holds 0 positions and VAF holds 843; the fund with broader holdings leads on diversification.
FRAR distributes approximately 1.8% (Monthly) and VAF approximately 3.2% (Quarterly); the higher distribution yield leads on income.
Over the compared period FRAR returned 3.5% and VAF returned 0.1%. 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.
FRAR top holdings
VAF top holdings
Sector weights for FRARare approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
FRAR sectors
VAF sectors
Geographic weights for FRARare approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
FRAR geography
VAF geography
FRAR scores 4.1/10 and VAF scores 7.5/10 on this comparison. VAF has the higher overall comparison score.
FRAR may suit investors who: investors who prefer larger, more established funds.
VAF may suit investors who: investors seeking broad market exposure.
FRAR and VAF 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.
VAF has the lower management fee. FRAR charges 0.5% per year ($50 per year on a $10,000 investment) and VAF charges 0.1% per year ($10 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $40 per year per $10,000 invested. General information only, not financial advice.
FRAR (Franklin Australian Absolute Return Bond Fund - Active ETF) manages approximately $714.51M and VAF (Vanguard Australian Fixed Interest Index ETF) manages approximately $3.5B. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee. General information only, not financial advice.
FRAR and VAF 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. FRAR charges 0.5% and VAF charges 0.1%, so VAF 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.
FRAR full profile →VAF full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →