VanEck MSCI Australian Sustainable Equity ETF vs Vanguard Ethically Conscious Australian Shares ETF
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.
GRNV and VETH are both ESG / Ethical ETFs. VETH has the lower management fee (0.16% vs 0.35% p.a.). Holdings overlap is approximately 44% (full holdings data).
VanEck MSCI Australian Sustainable Equity ETF
VanEck
Vanguard Ethically Conscious Australian 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.
Key differences at a glance
There is no single "better" fund here - which suits you depends on your goals. The clearest differences between GRNV and VETH:
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
VETH has the lower management fee - the one objective "cheaper" axis.
VETH is the larger fund. Larger is not inherently better, but greater scale can support tighter spreads and lower closure risk.
VETH spreads exposure across more holdings (GRNV 83, VETH 229); the other is more concentrated. Neither is inherently better - it depends on whether you want breadth or a focused tilt.
GRNV distributes approximately 3.47% and VETH approximately 2%; GRNV 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; sector and geography figures for some funds are category-inferred estimates, clearly labelled on each fund's page.
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 shared holdings ranked by overlap contribution, the smaller of each company's weight in the two funds. Basis: full holdings data.
Top 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures.
GRNV top holdings
VETH top holdings
Based on each fund's most recently published sector and geographic weightings; figures are approximate. Full breakdowns are shown below.
GRNV sectors
VETH sectors
Geographic weights for GRNVare approximate, inferred from the fund's category.
GRNV geography
VETH geography
There is no single right choice between GRNV and VETH - it depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. The key differences between the two funds are summarised near the top of this page, with the full side-by-side data below.
GRNV and VETH have approximately 44% holdings overlap, based on each fund's full published holdings list. This is considered moderate overlap.
VETH has the lower management fee. GRNV charges 0.35% per year ($35 per year on a $10,000 investment) and VETH charges 0.16% per year ($16 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $19 per year per $10,000 invested.
GRNV (VanEck MSCI Australian Sustainable Equity ETF) manages approximately $231.24M and VETH (Vanguard Ethically Conscious Australian Shares ETF) manages approximately $624M. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee.
You can hold both, but with approximately 44% estimated holdings overlap the two funds share a moderate proportion of holdings, so there is some duplicated exposure. Whether that suits you depends on your own objectives.
There is no universally right choice. It depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. GRNV charges 0.35% and VETH charges 0.16%, so VETH has the lower management fee, and they have approximately 44% estimated holdings overlap. 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.
GRNV full profile →VETH full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →