Fund-vs-fund · Australasian Equities
Fisher Funds Trans Tasman Equity Trust vs Mint New Zealand SRI Equity Fund
Both are Australasian Equities 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 investment mandate. The Mint New Zealand SRI Equity Fund applies a socially responsible investing (SRI) screen, constraining its universe to companies meeting defined ethical criteria, whereas the Fisher Funds Trans Tasman Equity Trust operates as an unconstrained Australasian equities portfolio. This shapes their portfolios meaningfully: Mint's top five holdings are concentrated heavily in Fisher & Paykel Healthcare (17.57%), Infratil (14.67%), Contact Energy (9.06%), Auckland International Airport (8.15%), and Meridian Energy (7.26%), reflecting a New Zealand-heavy, infrastructure-and-utilities tilt. Fisher Funds' top five are more diversified across sectors and geographies, including BHP Group (4.35%) and Xero (3.77%), with no single name exceeding 9.19%, suggesting lower stock-level concentration.
On fees, the difference is notable: Mint charges 0.97% annually versus Fisher Funds at 1.63% — a 66 basis-point gap. Both funds carry an identical risk indicator of 5 and near-identical growth asset allocations (98.31% each). Fund size is similar — Mint at NZD 71.5 million, Fisher Funds at NZD 65.2 million. Five-year returns diverge modestly: Fisher Funds at 0.55% per annum versus Mint at 0.15%, though past returns are not indicative of future performance and both figures cover the same five-year window without currency or tax-basis clarification in this snapshot.
Verify all figures against the source PDS and latest Quarterly Fund Update on FMA Disclose before relying on any of this information.
Comparison generated 2026-07-05 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
- Mint New Zealand SRI Equity Fund charges 0.66% lower in annual fund charges (0.97% vs 1.63%).
- Both are New Zealand PIE funds — investor tax is capped at the Prescribed Investor Rate (PIR), maximum 28%.
- Mint New Zealand SRI Equity Fund applies responsible-investment / ESG screening. The other fund does not.
Where each fund sits in its cohort
Percentile rank vs all 58 australasian equities funds we've matched on Sorted Smart Investor. Mechanical only — no opinion, no forward-looking view.
Annual fund charge
Lower is better
Fisher Funds
1.63%
Highest 4% of cohort
Mint
0.97%
Lower half of cohort
5-year return p.a.
Past performance — not a predictor
Fisher Funds
0.55%
Lower half over 5 years
Mint
0.15%
Bottom 10% over 5 years
Fund size
Larger = more stable, lower close-risk
Fisher Funds
NZ$65m
Lower half by size
Mint
NZ$72m
Lower half by size
| Metric | Fisher Funds | Mint | Lower / higher is |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual fund charge | 1.63% | 0.97% | Lower is better |
| Risk indicator (1–7) | 5 | 5 | Higher = more volatility |
| 5-year return p.a. | 0.55% | 0.15% | Higher is better (past not future) |
| Fund size | NZ$65m | NZ$72m | 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 | Yes | 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
6
of each fund's top 10
Fisher Funds weight in shared
30.2%
of Fisher Funds Trans Tasman Equity Trust top 10 is shared
Mint weight in shared
58.7%
of Mint New Zealand SRI Equity Fund top 10 is shared
| Holding | Fisher Funds | Mint |
|---|---|---|
 Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Corp Ltd NZ | 9.19% | 17.57% |
 Infratil Limited NZ | 6.91% | 14.67% |
 Mainfreight Limited NZ | 4.51% | 6.09% |
 Auckland International Airport Limited NZ | 3.44% | 8.15% |
 Summerset Group Ltd NZ | 3.18% | 5.61% |
 EBOS Group Limited NZ | 2.99% | 6.62% |
"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
Fisher Funds
Fisher Funds Trans Tasman Equity Trust
The fund focuses on growth of your investment over the long term by investing in Australasian companiesFull Fisher Funds Fisher Funds Trans Tasman Equity Trust profile →
Mint
Mint New Zealand SRI Equity Fund
Typically invests in New Zealand-listed equities and has an investment objective of outperforming the S&P/NZX50 Gross Index after fees and expenses over the medium to long term. The Fund is designed to meet specific responsible investment criteria, with the aim of building a portfolio where the holdings in aggregate, generate a better ESG score in our systems than the benchmark.Full Mint Mint New Zealand SRI Equity Fund profile →
Documents
Crawled directly from each manager's website. How we record provenance →
Fisher Funds
LiveLast verified 2026-05-08
Mint
LiveLast verified 2026-05-08
Common questions
What's the difference between the Fisher Funds Trans Tasman Equity Trust and the Mint New Zealand SRI Equity Fund?
Which fund has lower fees, Fisher Funds Trans Tasman Equity Trust or Mint New Zealand SRI Equity Fund?
How do the 5-year returns compare?
Are both funds PIE-taxed in NZ?
Does either fund apply responsible-investment screening?
Where can I read the official documents for these funds?
