Fund-vs-fund · International Equities
BetaShares Global Quality Leaders FundvsMercer Core Hedged Global Shares Fund
BetaShares Global Quality Leaders Fund (fund size NZ$19.0 million, annual fund charge 0.49%) and Mercer Core Hedged Global Shares Fund (fund size NZ$17.6 million, annual fund charge 1.46%) are both international equities managed funds, as shown on Sorted Smart Investor on 22 May 2026; Mercer Core Hedged Global Shares Fund's 1-year return after fees and tax was 15.93% 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 Global | Mercer Core | Min weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| ig | 0.10% | 0.01% | 0.01% |
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 cost. The Mercer Core Hedged Global Shares Fund charges an annual fund fee of 1.46%, nearly three times the 0.49% charged by the BetaShares Global Quality Leaders Fund — a gap that compounds meaningfully over long holding periods in otherwise similarly structured portfolios.
Both funds sit at risk indicator 5 and carry an almost identical growth asset allocation of 98.31%, placing them in comparable risk territory within the International Equities category. Fund sizes are also close: Mercer at NZD 17.6 million versus BetaShares at NZD 18.9 million, suggesting neither has yet achieved significant scale.
On performance, Mercer discloses a five-year annualised return of 9.28%. BetaShares' five-year return is not available in the current snapshot — likely reflecting a shorter fund history — so a like-for-like return comparison cannot be made at this time.
The funds diverge meaningfully in portfolio construction. Mercer's top holdings are heavily concentrated in mega-cap US technology names, with Nvidia (5.25%) and Apple (4.92%) as the two largest positions. BetaShares' disclosed holdings are more evenly spread, with no single position exceeding 2.1%, and the names — Lam Research, Applied Materials, Johnson & Johnson, Cisco — suggest a quality-factor screen rather than a market-cap-weighted approach. Mercer's fund name also flags currency hedging as a structural feature, which BetaShares does not explicitly indicate in the data provided.
Always verify these details against the source PDS 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 Global Quality Leaders Fund charges 0.97% lower in annual fund charges (0.49% vs 1.46%).
- 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 84 international equities funds we've matched on Sorted Smart Investor. Mechanical only — no opinion, no forward-looking view.
Annual fund charge
Lower is better
BetaShares
0.49%
Lower half of cohort
Mercer
1.46%
Highest 10% of cohort
5-year return p.a.
Past performance — not a predictor
BetaShares
—
—
Mercer
9.28%
Upper half over 5 years
Fund size
Larger = more stable, lower close-risk
BetaShares
NZ$19m
Smallest 16% in cohort
Mercer
NZ$18m
Smallest 14% in cohort
| Metric | BetaShares | Mercer | Lower / higher is |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual fund charge | 0.49% | 1.46% | Lower is better |
| Risk indicator (1–7) | 5 | 5 | Higher = more volatility |
| 5-year return p.a. | — | 9.28% | Higher is better (past not future) |
| Fund size | NZ$19m | NZ$18m | 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 to NZD | 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 Global Quality Leaders Fund
The fund aims to provide an investment return that tracks the performance of the iSTOXX MUTB Global ex-Australia Quality Leaders 150 Index, before taking into account fees and expenses.Full BetaShares BetaShares Global Quality Leaders Fund profile →
Mercer
Mercer Core Hedged Global Shares Fund
The fund invests in shares listed on share markets predominately in developed economies and is fully hedged to the New Zealand dollar. The portfolio uses multiple managers and is diversified by region, manager and investment approaches. Environmental, Social and Governance characteristics are integrated into the underlying investment managers’ investment processes. The fund aims to provide a Gross Return above the return of the MSCI World Index with net dividends reinvested (100% hedged NZD on an after-tax basis) on a rolling three-year basis.Full Mercer Mercer Core Hedged Global Shares Fund profile →
Documents
Crawled directly from each manager's website. How we record provenance →
BetaShares
Common questions
What's the difference between the BetaShares Global Quality Leaders Fund and the Mercer Core Hedged Global Shares Fund?
Which fund has lower fees, BetaShares Global Quality Leaders Fund or Mercer Core Hedged Global Shares Fund?
Are both funds PIE-taxed in NZ?
Where can I read the official documents for these funds?
