VanEck FTSE Global Infrastructure (AUD Hedged) ETF vs VanEck Australian Resources ETF
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.
IFRA and MVR are both Thematic ETFs. IFRA has the lower management fee (0.31% vs 0.35% p.a.). Holdings overlap is approximately 0% estimated (top 35 holdings).
VanEck FTSE Global Infrastructure (AUD Hedged) ETF
VanEck
VanEck Australian Resources ETF
VanEck
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
Which of IFRA and MVR fits depends on your objectives, not on one being superior. Where the two funds differ most:
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
IFRA has the lower management fee - the one objective "cheaper" axis.
IFRA is the larger fund. Larger is not inherently better, but greater scale can support tighter spreads and lower closure risk.
IFRA spreads exposure across more holdings (IFRA 136, MVR 34); the other is more concentrated. Neither is inherently better - it depends on whether you want breadth or a focused tilt.
IFRA distributes approximately 3% and MVR approximately 2.37%; IFRA 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: top 35 holdings.
Top 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures.
IFRA top holdings
MVR top holdings
Sector weights for MVRare approximate, inferred from the fund's category.
IFRA sectors
MVR sectors
Geographic weights for MVRare approximate, inferred from the fund's category.
IFRA geography
MVR geography
Choosing between IFRA and MVR depends on your goals, time horizon and current holdings, not on one being the right answer for everyone. The main differences are summarised above, with the complete data below.
IFRA and MVR have approximately 0% estimated holdings overlap (top 35 holdings). This is considered low overlap, estimated from listed top holdings rather than the full constituent lists.
IFRA has the lower management fee. IFRA charges 0.31% per year ($31 per year on a $10,000 investment) and MVR charges 0.35% per year ($35 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $4 per year per $10,000 invested.
IFRA (VanEck FTSE Global Infrastructure (AUD Hedged) ETF) manages approximately $2.0B and MVR (VanEck Australian Resources ETF) manages approximately $649.82M. 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 0% estimated holdings overlap the two funds hold mostly different companies, so they can be more complementary. 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. IFRA charges 0.31% and MVR charges 0.35%, so IFRA has the lower management fee, and they have approximately 0% 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.
IFRA full profile →MVR full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →