Milford Active Growth Fund vs Milford Aggressive Fund

The most material structural difference between these two Milford funds is their allocation to growth assets. The Milford Active Growth Fund holds 78.34% in growth assets against 98.31% for the Milford Aggressive Fund, a gap of roughly 20 percentage points that drives most of the other differences between them. This higher defensive allocation in the Active Growth Fund is reflected in its lower risk indicator of 4 (on a scale of 1 to 7), compared to the Aggressive Fund's risk indicator of 5.

Both funds are managed by Milford and share the same Product Disclosure Statement dated 18 June 2025, though they are distinct portfolios. The Aggressive Fund charges a slightly higher annual fund charge of 1.15% versus 1.05% for the Active Growth Fund. On fund size, the Active Growth Fund is materially larger at approximately NZD 5.98 billion compared to NZD 3.69 billion for the Aggressive Fund.

The five-year return for the Active Growth Fund is disclosed at 6.79% per annum; no five-year return figure is available for the Aggressive Fund in this snapshot, likely reflecting its shorter operating history. Top holdings also differ notably in character: the Active Growth Fund's largest position is a New Zealand government bond, suggesting some fixed-income exposure, while the Aggressive Fund's disclosed holdings are dominated by global equities such as NVIDIA, Microsoft, and Amazon, alongside a USD cash position of 7.09%.

Always verify these details against each fund's current PDS and latest Quarterly Fund Update on FMA Disclose before relying on this information for any investment decision.