Fund-vs-fund · Australasian Equities
Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE FundvsKernel Australia 100 Fund
Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund (fund size NZ$54.7 million, annual fund charge 0.98%) and Kernel Australia 100 Fund (fund size NZ$53.4 million, annual fund charge 0.25%) 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 12 of the same securities. If you held both, roughly 9.7% 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 | Hyperion Australian | Kernel Australia | Min weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Macquarie Group | 7.59% | 3.03% | 3.03% |
| CSL | 2.09% | 2.89% | 2.09% |
| Brambles | 1.31% | 1.30% | 1.30% |
| ResMed | 2.70% | 0.77% | 0.77% |
| Cochlear Ltd | 5.78% | 0.47% | 0.47% |
| ALS Ltd | 2.68% | 0.45% | 0.45% |
| Technology One Ltd | 3.95% | 0.35% | 0.35% |
| REA GROUP LTD | 2.53% | 0.33% | 0.33% |
| PRO MEDICUS LTD | 2.00% | 0.27% | 0.27% |
| Fisher & Paykel Healthcare | 9.30% | 0.26% | 0.26% |
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, concentrated portfolio targeting high-conviction growth companies, while the Kernel Australia 100 Fund is a passive, index-tracking vehicle designed to replicate broad Australian market exposure. This distinction drives nearly every other difference between them.
Fee levels reflect this directly. Hyperion charges an annual fund charge of 0.98%, compared to Kernel's 0.25% — a 73-basis-point gap that compounds meaningfully over time. Neither fund discloses a five-year return figure in this snapshot, so historical performance cannot be compared here.
Their risk indicators differ by one step on the standard seven-point scale — Hyperion sits at 6, Kernel at 5 — consistent with Hyperion's concentrated, high-growth mandate. Both funds allocate 98.31% to growth assets and are similar in size (approximately NZD 54.7 million and NZD 53.4 million respectively).
Portfolio construction diverges sharply. Hyperion's top five holdings span mining, healthcare, fintech, and financial services, with no single sector dominating. Kernel's top five are entirely Australian banks and BHP, reflecting the composition of a broad Australian index where financials carry significant weight.
Neither fund is a KiwiSaver scheme account product based on the data provided. Five-year return figures are absent for both funds in this snapshot.
Always verify all details — including fees, holdings, and risk indicators — against each fund's current Product Disclosure Statement 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
- Kernel Australia 100 Fund charges 0.73% lower in annual fund charges (0.25% 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
Hyperion
0.98%
Lower half of cohort
Kernel
0.25%
Lowest 11% of cohort
5-year return p.a.
Past performance — not a predictor
Hyperion
—
—
Kernel
—
—
Fund size
Larger = more stable, lower close-risk
Hyperion
NZ$55m
Lower half by size
Kernel
NZ$53m
Lower half by size
| Metric | Hyperion | Kernel | Lower / higher is |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual fund charge | 0.98% | 0.25% | Lower is better |
| Risk indicator (1–7) | 6 | 5 | Higher = more volatility |
| 5-year return p.a. | — | — | Higher is better (past not future) |
| Fund size | NZ$55m | NZ$53m | 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
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 →
Kernel
Kernel Australia 100 Fund
The Kernel Australia 100 Fund�s investment objective is to provide a return (before tax, fees and expenses) that closely matches the return on the S&P/ASX 100 Index.Full Kernel Kernel Australia 100 Fund profile →
Common questions
What's the difference between the Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund and the Kernel Australia 100 Fund?
Which fund has lower fees, Hyperion Australian Growth Companies PIE Fund or Kernel Australia 100 Fund?
Are both funds PIE-taxed in NZ?
Where can I read the official documents for these funds?
