Fund-vs-fund · Diversified
AMP Growth Managed Fund vs Octagon Balanced Fund
Both are Diversified funds available to NZ retail investors. Numbers below are sourced from the FMA Disclose register via Sorted Smart Investor and reflect the latest published quarterly fund updates.
Why these two differ
The most material structural difference between these two funds is their growth asset allocation. The AMP Growth Managed Fund holds 78.34% in growth assets, compared with 52.35% for the Octagon Balanced Fund — a gap of roughly 26 percentage points that shapes the risk-return profile of each, even though both carry the same risk indicator of 4 out of 7. Investors seeking higher equity exposure within a diversified wrapper will find a markedly different portfolio construction between the two.
On fees, Octagon charges an annual fund charge of 1.17% versus AMP's 0.81%, a difference of 36 basis points that compounds meaningfully over time. For five-year returns, Octagon discloses 3.83% per annum; AMP's five-year return figure is not available in this snapshot, so a direct long-run performance comparison cannot be made from these data alone.
Fund size is comparable — Octagon at NZD 39.6 million and AMP at NZD 44.2 million. Portfolio construction differs in emphasis: Octagon's largest holding is the Hunter Global Fixed Interest Fund at 18.85%, reflecting its more defensive tilt, while AMP's disclosed top holdings are individual equities including Fisher & Paykel Healthcare, NVIDIA, and Apple, suggesting more direct equity exposure. Both funds hold Fisher & Paykel Healthcare in their top five.
Neither fund is a KiwiSaver scheme account product based on the data presented here.
Verify all figures against each fund's current Product Disclosure Statement and latest Quarterly Fund Update on FMA Disclose before making any investment decision.
Cached comparison generated 2026-05-21 from each fund's latest FMA Disclose QFU. Regenerated when the underlying facts change.
What's different at a glance
- AMP Growth Managed Fund charges 0.36% lower in annual fund charges (0.81% vs 1.17%).
- Both are New Zealand PIE funds — investor tax is capped at the Prescribed Investor Rate (PIR), maximum 28%.
Where each fund sits in its cohort
Percentile rank vs all 67 diversified funds we've matched on Sorted Smart Investor. Mechanical only — no opinion, no forward-looking view.
Annual fund charge
Lower is better
AMP
0.81%
Lower half of cohort
Octagon
1.17%
Upper half of cohort
5-year return p.a.
Past performance — not a predictor
AMP
—
—
Octagon
3.18%
Lower half over 5 years
Fund size
Larger = more stable, lower close-risk
AMP
NZ$44m
Lower half by size
Octagon
NZ$37m
Lower half by size
| Metric | AMP | Octagon | Lower / higher is |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual fund charge | 0.81% | 1.17% | Lower is better |
| Risk indicator (1–7) | 4 | 4 | Higher = more volatility |
| 5-year return p.a. | — | 3.18% | Higher is better (past not future) |
| Fund size | NZ$44m | NZ$37m | Larger = more stable, lower close-risk |
| Growth / income split | 78% / 22% | 53% / 47% | More growth = higher long-run return + volatility |
| NZ tax structure | PIE (PIR-capped) | PIE (PIR-capped) | PIE = simpler. FIF = annual return. |
| Currency hedging | — | — | Hedged smooths NZD/foreign FX moves at a small cost. |
| Responsible investment screening | No | No | Specific exclusions live in each fund's SIPO. |
| Available via | Direct | Direct | Platforms accepting retail subscriptions. |
Portfolio overlap
How many top-10 positions both funds hold, and at what weight. Computed from each fund's most recently disclosed top-10 holdings — exact-name matched (Microsoft Corp. = Microsoft Corporation), with a Cash / Cash & Equivalents collapse rule.
Matching holdings
2
of each fund's top 10
AMP weight in shared
4.2%
of AMP Growth Managed Fund top 10 is shared
Octagon weight in shared
2.9%
of Octagon Balanced Fund top 10 is shared
| Holding | AMP | Octagon |
|---|---|---|
 Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Corporation Limited NZ | 2.83% | 1.87% |
 Microsoft Corp US | 1.38% | 1.07% |
"Min weight" = the smaller of the two weights — a conservative read of how much exposure you'd have to that position if you held both funds.
What each fund says it does
AMP
AMP Growth Managed Fund
The fund has a well-diversified portfolio that aims to provide growth, primarily through holding growth assets diversified with a lower allocation to lower-risk income assets. The fund aims to achieve medium to high returns, in exchange there will be larger movements up and down in the value of your investments.Full AMP AMP Growth Managed Fund profile →
Octagon
Octagon Balanced Fund
The Balanced Fund invests across multiple asset classes. Investors can expect moderate to high levels of movement up and down in value. It aims to achieve long-term returns (before fees, taxes and other expenses) greater than a composite benchmark.Full Octagon Octagon Balanced Fund profile →
Documents
Crawled directly from each manager's website. How we record provenance →
Common questions
What's the difference between the AMP Growth Managed Fund and the Octagon Balanced Fund?
Which fund has lower fees, AMP Growth Managed Fund or Octagon Balanced Fund?
Are both funds PIE-taxed in NZ?
Where can I read the official documents for these funds?
