iShares Core FTSE Global Infrastructure (AUD Hedged) ETF vs Hejaz High Innovation Active ETF
These ETFs do not share enough listed holdings to estimate overlap. General information only.
GLIN may suit cost-conscious investors who prioritise lower ongoing fees. HHIF 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.
iShares Core FTSE Global Infrastructure (AUD Hedged) ETF
BlackRock (iShares)
Hejaz High Innovation Active ETF
Other
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.
GLIN and HHIF are both Thematic ETFs: GLIN tracks the and HHIF tracks the . GLIN has the lower management fee (0.15% vs 1.55% 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.
GLIN charges 0.15% p.a. and HHIF charges 1.55% p.a.; the lower fee leads on cost.
GLIN manages $1.6B and HHIF manages $9.64M; the larger fund leads on scale, which can support tighter spreads.
GLIN holds 157 positions and HHIF holds 0; the fund with broader holdings leads on diversification.
GLIN distributes approximately 2.35% (Quarterly) and HHIF approximately 0% (N/A); the higher distribution yield leads on income.
Over the compared period GLIN returned 10.8% and HHIF returned -6.0%. 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.
GLIN top holdings
HHIF top holdings
Holdings not published for this fund type.
Sector weights for HHIFare approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
GLIN sectors
HHIF sectors
Geographic weights for HHIFare approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
GLIN geography
HHIF geography
GLIN scores 6.6/10 and HHIF scores 0.6/10 on this comparison. GLIN has the higher overall comparison score.
GLIN may suit investors who: cost-conscious investors who prioritise lower ongoing fees.
HHIF may suit investors who: investors who prefer larger, more established funds.
GLIN and HHIF 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.
GLIN has the lower management fee. GLIN charges 0.15% per year ($15 per year on a $10,000 investment) and HHIF charges 1.55% per year ($155 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $140 per year per $10,000 invested. General information only, not financial advice.
GLIN (iShares Core FTSE Global Infrastructure (AUD Hedged) ETF) manages approximately $1.6B and HHIF (Hejaz High Innovation Active ETF) manages approximately $9.64M. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee. General information only, not financial advice.
GLIN and HHIF 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. GLIN charges 0.15% and HHIF charges 1.55%, so GLIN 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.
GLIN full profile →HHIF full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →