Betashares Global Gold Miners Currency Hedged ETF vs VanEck MSCI International Small Companies Quality (AUD Hedged) ETF
General information only, not financial advice.
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.
Betashares Global Gold Miners Currency Hedged ETF
BetaShares
VanEck MSCI International Small Companies Quality (AUD Hedged) ETF
VanEck
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.
MNRS and QHSM are both Thematic ETFs: MNRS tracks the NYSE Arca Gold Miners Index (Hedged into AUD) and QHSM tracks the . MNRS has the lower management fee (0.57% vs 0.62% p.a.). Holdings overlap is approximately 2% (full holdings data). General information only, not financial advice.
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
MNRS charges 0.57% p.a. and QHSM charges 0.62% p.a.; the lower fee leads on cost.
MNRS manages $248.9M and QHSM manages $264.71M; the larger fund leads on scale, which can support tighter spreads.
MNRS holds 57 positions and QHSM holds 150; the fund with broader holdings leads on diversification.
MNRS distributes approximately 0.2% (Semi-annually) and QHSM approximately 1.06% (Quarterly); the higher distribution yield leads on income.
Over the compared period MNRS returned 21.6% and QHSM returned 20.0%. 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 shared holdings ranked by overlap contribution, the smaller of each company's weight in the two funds. Basis: full holdings data. General information only.
Top 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures. General information only.
MNRS top holdings
QHSM top holdings
MNRS sectors
QHSM sectors
Geographic weights for QHSMare approximate, inferred from the fund's category. General information only.
MNRS geography
QHSM geography
MNRS scores 4.1/10 and QHSM scores 4.8/10 on this comparison. QHSM has the higher overall comparison score.
MNRS may suit investors who: growth-oriented investors (noting past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns).
QHSM may suit investors who: growth-oriented investors (noting past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns).
MNRS and QHSM have approximately 2% holdings overlap, based on each fund's full published holdings list. This is considered low overlap. General information only, not financial advice.
MNRS has the lower management fee. MNRS charges 0.57% per year ($57 per year on a $10,000 investment) and QHSM charges 0.62% per year ($62 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $5 per year per $10,000 invested. General information only, not financial advice.
MNRS (Betashares Global Gold Miners Currency Hedged ETF) manages approximately $248.9M and QHSM (VanEck MSCI International Small Companies Quality (AUD Hedged) ETF) manages approximately $264.71M. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee. General information only, not financial advice.
You can hold both, but with approximately 2% 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. General information only, not financial advice.
There is no universally right choice. It depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. MNRS charges 0.57% and QHSM charges 0.62%, so MNRS has the lower management fee, and they have approximately 2% 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, 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.
MNRS full profile →QHSM full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →