Fund-vs-fund · Australasian Equities
BetaShares Australia 200 FundvsHyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund
BetaShares Australia 200 Fund (fund size NZ$54.2 million, annual fund charge 0.23%) and Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund (fund size NZ$54.7 million, annual fund charge 0.98%) are both Australasian equities managed funds, as shown on Sorted Smart Investor on 22 May 2026; Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund's 1-year return after fees and tax was −18.67% for the year to 31 March 2026, per its quarterly fund update filed on FMA Disclose.
How much do these two overlap?
They hold 1 of the same securities. If you held both, roughly 0.0% of your money would be in the same companies — so the diversification you get from holding the pair is smaller than holding two funds suggests.
| Shared holding | BetaShares Australia | Hyperion Australian | Min weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| guzman y gomez | 0.04% | 2.16% | 0.04% |
Min weight is the smaller of the two weightings — if you hold both funds, that is the floor of your exposure to that position. Direct holdings only: anything either fund holds through an underlying fund or ETF is not counted, so the real overlap can only be higher. From each fund's FMA Disclose full portfolio filing.
Why these two differ
The most material structural difference between these two funds is their investment philosophy: the Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund is an actively managed, high-conviction portfolio, while the BetaShares Australia 200 Fund is a passive index-tracking vehicle designed to replicate the broad Australian equity market. This distinction drives most of the other differences between them.
The fee gap is substantial. Hyperion charges an annual fund charge of 0.98%, compared with BetaShares at 0.23% — a difference of 75 basis points that compounds meaningfully over time. Both funds report identical growth asset allocations of 98.31%, and their fund sizes are closely matched at approximately NZD 54.7 million and NZD 54.2 million respectively.
The risk indicators diverge: Hyperion sits at 6 on the FMA's 1–7 scale, BetaShares at 5, reflecting the higher volatility typically associated with concentrated active strategies. Hyperion's top five holdings include BHP, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare, Sigma Pharmaceuticals, Block Inc., and Macquarie Group — a concentrated mix spanning resources, healthcare, and fintech. BetaShares' top holdings are dominated by the four major Australian banks plus BHP, consistent with the cap-weighted composition of the ASX 200. Neither fund discloses a five-year return figure in the current snapshot, so historical performance cannot be compared here.
Always verify current fees, returns, and asset allocation against each fund's product disclosure statement and latest quarterly fund update on FMA Disclose before relying on any of this information.
Comparison generated 2026-05-21 from each fund's FMA Disclose QFU facts as at that date. If the underlying facts change, this narrative is withheld until it is regenerated — the tables on this page always reflect the current data.
What's different at a glance
- BetaShares Australia 200 Fund charges 0.75% lower in annual fund charges (0.23% vs 0.98%).
- 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 57 australasian equities funds we've matched on Sorted Smart Investor. Mechanical only — no opinion, no forward-looking view.
Annual fund charge
Lower is better
BetaShares
0.23%
Lowest 6% of cohort
Hyperion
0.98%
Lower half of cohort
5-year return p.a.
Past performance — not a predictor
BetaShares
—
—
Hyperion
—
—
Fund size
Larger = more stable, lower close-risk
BetaShares
NZ$54m
Lower half by size
Hyperion
NZ$55m
Lower half by size
| Metric | BetaShares | Hyperion | Lower / higher is |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual fund charge | 0.23% | 0.98% | Lower is better |
| Risk indicator (1–7) | 5 | 6 | Higher = more volatility |
| 5-year return p.a. | — | — | Higher is better (past not future) |
| Fund size | NZ$54m | NZ$55m | Larger = more stable, lower close-risk |
| Growth / income split | 98% / 2% | 98% / 2% | 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. |
What each fund says it does
BetaShares
BetaShares Australia 200 Fund
The fund aims to provide an investment return that tracks the performance of the Solactive Australia 200 Index, before taking into account fees and expenses.Full BetaShares BetaShares Australia 200 Fund profile →
Hyperion
Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund
The Fund invests primarily in growth-oriented Australian listed companies included in the S&P/ASX 300 Index at the time of initial investment and will also have some exposure to cash.Full Hyperion Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund profile →
Common questions
What's the difference between the BetaShares Australia 200 Fund and the Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund?
Which fund has lower fees, BetaShares Australia 200 Fund or Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund?
Are both funds PIE-taxed in NZ?
Where can I read the official documents for these funds?
