AMP Balanced Managed Fund vs Fisher Funds Balanced Strategy 45/55 Fund

The most material structural difference in this comparison is data availability: the FMA Disclose snapshot for Fisher Funds Balanced Strategy 45/55 Fund returns no disclosed figures — no annual fund charge, no risk indicator, no growth asset allocation, no fund size, and no top holdings — making a quantitative side-by-side largely one-sided. All numerical observations below therefore draw solely from AMP's data.

Both funds sit in the Diversified category, but only AMP Balanced Managed Fund discloses its asset mix in this snapshot: 53.15% growth assets, positioning it broadly in line with a typical balanced mandate. AMP carries a risk indicator of 4 (on the standard 1–7 scale used by FMA-regulated funds), and its annual fund charge is disclosed at 0.81%. The fund size is approximately NZD 44.6 million. Its five disclosed top holdings span domestic equity (Fisher & Paykel Healthcare at 2.01%), New Zealand Government inflation-linked bonds (two lines totalling around 3.23%), and global equity (NVIDIA at 1.67%, Apple at 1.47%), suggesting a multi-asset, geographically diversified approach. Five-year return figures are not available for either fund in this snapshot.

Fisher Funds Balanced Strategy 45/55 Fund's name implies a roughly 45% growth / 55% income split, but none of that is confirmed by the data available here. Investors cannot draw conclusions about fees, risk profile, or performance for that fund from this snapshot alone.

Verify all details against each fund's current Product Disclosure Statement and latest Quarterly Fund Update on FMA Disclose before relying on any of this information.