BetaShares Australian Investment Grade Corporate Bond Fund (NZD Hedged) vs Fisher Funds Income Fund

The most material structural difference between these two funds is fee level. Fisher Funds Income Fund charges an annual fund charge of 0.99%, nearly three times the 0.34% charged by BetaShares Australian Investment Grade Corporate Bond Fund (NZD Hedged). Over a multi-year horizon, that gap compounds meaningfully against net returns, making it a central consideration for any cost-sensitive investor comparing funds within the same International Fixed Income category.

On risk, the funds diverge despite sharing the same growth assets allocation of 0.07%. Fisher Funds Income Fund carries a risk indicator of 3 (out of 7), while the BetaShares fund sits at 4, suggesting the latter exhibits higher return volatility as measured under the standard FMA risk indicator methodology. Both funds are similarly sized — Fisher at NZD 42.2 million and BetaShares at NZD 28.1 million.

Performance comparisons are one-sided: Fisher Funds Income Fund discloses a five-year annualised return of 2.2%, while no five-year return figure is available for the BetaShares fund in this snapshot, likely reflecting its shorter operating history on the New Zealand register.

Portfolio composition also differs. Fisher's top holdings are weighted toward New Zealand-domiciled issuers — LGFA, TR Group, Westpac NZ — suggesting a domestic credit tilt. BetaShares' holdings are Australian and international investment-grade corporate bonds, NZD-hedged, with names including Emirates NBD, Stockland Trust, and E.ON SE, reflecting a distinctly different geographic and issuer exposure.

Always verify current fees, returns, and holdings against each fund's product disclosure statement and latest quarterly fund update on FMA Disclose before relying on any of this information.