Harbour NZ Corporate Bond Fund vs Milford Trans-Tasman Bond Fund

The most material structural difference between these two funds is fee level. The Harbour NZ Corporate Bond Fund discloses an annual fund charge of 0.47%, compared with 0.65% for the Milford Trans-Tasman Bond Fund — an 18-basis-point gap that compounds over time within the same NZ Fixed Interest category and identical risk indicator of 3 (on a 1–7 scale).

Both funds carry a growth asset allocation of 0.13%, signalling comparable income-oriented positioning, and both share a risk indicator of 3, suggesting similar expected volatility profiles as disclosed. On the five-year return figure, Milford returns 1.66% against Harbour's 1.38% annualised — a 28-basis-point performance differential in Milford's favour over that period, though past returns are not a reliable indicator of future performance.

Fund size differs substantially: Milford's fund stands at approximately NZD 2.14 billion versus Harbour's NZD 608 million, which may have implications for liquidity management and scale, though neither fund discloses specific commentary on this in the data available here.

The top holdings reveal a subtle portfolio tilt distinction. Milford's five largest positions are concentrated in NZ Local Government Funding Agency and Housing New Zealand paper — quasi-government agency bonds. Harbour's top holdings skew toward direct NZ Government Stock across multiple maturities, with corporate and bank exposure (Kiwibank FRN) appearing lower in the list, somewhat at odds with the fund's "Corporate Bond" name, though the full portfolio composition is not captured in the top-five snapshot.

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 figure here.