iShares Government Inflation ETF vs Macquarie Subordinated Debt Active ETF
These ETFs invest in different asset classes (shares vs bonds). They are unlikely to share holdings.
ILB may suit cost-conscious investors who prioritise lower ongoing fees. MQSD may suit investors seeking income and dividend distributions.
Scored across Cost, Scale, Diversification, Income and Performance.
See full breakdown ↓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%.
iShares Government Inflation ETF
BlackRock (iShares)
Macquarie Subordinated Debt 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.
ILB and MQSD are both Bonds ETFs: ILB tracks the and MQSD tracks the . ILB has the lower management fee (0.18% vs 0.29% p.a.). A holdings overlap is not reliably estimable for this pair.
Key differences at a glance
There is no single "better" fund here - which suits you depends on your goals. The clearest differences between ILB and MQSD:
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
ILB charges 0.18% p.a. and MQSD charges 0.29% p.a.; the lower fee leads on cost.
ILB manages $1.2B and MQSD manages $595.43M; the larger fund leads on scale, which can support tighter spreads.
ILB holds 7 positions and MQSD holds 145; the fund with broader holdings leads on diversification.
ILB distributes approximately 1.46% (Monthly) and MQSD approximately 5.39% (Monthly); the higher distribution yield leads on income.
Over the compared period ILB returned 1.6% and MQSD returned 7.1%. 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.
Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
Top 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures.
ILB top holdings
MQSD top holdings
Sector weights for ILB and MQSDare approximate, inferred from the fund's category.
ILB sectors
MQSD sectors
Geographic weights for ILB and MQSDare approximate, inferred from the fund's category.
ILB geography
MQSD geography
There is no single right choice between ILB and MQSD - it depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. The key differences are summarised near the top of this page; the two funds may suit different investors:
ILB may suit investors who: cost-conscious investors who prioritise lower ongoing fees.
MQSD may suit investors who: investors seeking income and dividend distributions.
ILB and MQSD do not share enough listed top holdings to reliably estimate a holdings overlap. Compare their fees, holdings and sectors on this page.
ILB has the lower management fee. ILB charges 0.18% per year ($18 per year on a $10,000 investment) and MQSD charges 0.29% per year ($29 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $11 per year per $10,000 invested.
ILB (iShares Government Inflation ETF) manages approximately $1.2B and MQSD (Macquarie Subordinated Debt Active ETF) manages approximately $595.43M. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee.
ILB and MQSD do not share enough listed top holdings to estimate overlap, so whether holding both duplicates your exposure depends on their full constituent lists.
There is no universally right choice. It depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. ILB charges 0.18% and MQSD charges 0.29%, so ILB 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.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.
ILB full profile →MQSD full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →