Fund-vs-fund · Listed Property
Mint Australasian Property Fund vs Salt Enhanced Property Fund
Both are Listed Property 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 difference between these two funds is their five-year return history. The Mint Australasian Property Fund returned 2.51% per annum over five years, compared with 1.67% per annum for the Salt Enhanced Property Fund — a gap of 84 basis points over that period. Both figures are past returns and carry no guarantee of future performance.
On fees, the difference is modest: Mint charges 1.07% in annual fund charges against Salt's 1.02%, a 5-basis-point spread. Both funds carry a risk indicator of 5 out of 7 and hold an almost identical growth-asset allocation of 98.31%, indicating closely matched risk profiles by these measures. Fund sizes are similarly small — Mint at NZD 16.95 million and Salt at NZD 18.35 million — which investors monitoring liquidity risk may wish to note.
Portfolio construction is broadly similar, with Goodman Property Trust, Precinct Properties NZ, Kiwi Property Group, and Property for Industry appearing in both top-five holdings. The key divergence is that Mint holds Stride Property (8.73%) where Salt holds none in its top five, while Salt holds Vital Healthcare Property Trust (11.82%) where Mint holds none in its top five — reflecting different sector tilts within Australasian listed property.
A PDS link for the Salt Enhanced Property Fund was not available in our data snapshot; Fund B's current PDS should be sourced directly from FMA Disclose. Always verify fees, holdings, and returns against each fund's current Product Disclosure Statement and latest Quarterly Fund Update on FMA Disclose before relying on any information here.
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
- Salt Enhanced Property Fund charges 0.05% lower in annual fund charges (1.02% vs 1.07%).
- 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 15 listed property funds we've matched on Sorted Smart Investor. Mechanical only — no opinion, no forward-looking view.
Annual fund charge
Lower is better
Mint
1.07%
Upper half of cohort
Salt
1.02%
Lower half of cohort
5-year return p.a.
Past performance — not a predictor
Mint
2.51%
Lower half over 5 years
Salt
1.67%
Lower half over 5 years
Fund size
Larger = more stable, lower close-risk
Mint
NZ$17m
Smallest 23% in cohort
Salt
NZ$18m
Lower half by size
| Metric | Mint | Salt | Lower / higher is |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual fund charge | 1.07% | 1.02% | Lower is better |
| Risk indicator (1–7) | 5 | 5 | Higher = more volatility |
| 5-year return p.a. | 2.51% | 1.67% | Higher is better (past not future) |
| Fund size | NZ$17m | 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 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. |
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
7
of each fund's top 10
Mint weight in shared
90.8%
of Mint Australasian Property Fund top 10 is shared
Salt weight in shared
92.1%
of Salt Enhanced Property Fund top 10 is shared
| Holding | Mint | Salt |
|---|---|---|
| GP Goodman Property Trust NZ | 18.69% | 19.88% |
 Precinct Properties NZ Ltd NZ | 18.57% | 20.63% |
 Kiwi Property Group Ltd NZ | 16.60% | 13.80% |
| PF Property for Industry Ltd NZ | 13.75% | 9.76% |
 Vital Healthcare Property Trust NZ | 8.24% | 11.82% |
 Stride Property Ltd and Stride Invest Mgmt Ltd NZ | 8.73% | 6.79% |
 Argosy Property Trust NZ | 6.20% | 9.43% |
"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
Mint
Mint Australasian Property Fund
The Fund invests predominantly in Australasian listed property and property-related equities. The Fund is benchmarked against the S&P/NZX All Real Estate (Industry Group) Gross Index with an investment objective of outperforming the benchmark after fees and expenses, over the medium to long term.Full Mint Mint Australasian Property Fund profile →
Salt
Salt Enhanced Property Fund
The Fund targets a portfolio of shares of New Zealand and Australian property trusts, companies and other property-related securities. The Fund may also, at our discretion short sell securities, hold cash, lever its assets and utilise active currency management to generate returns (although generally will be fully hedged). The investment objective is to outperform the S&P/NZX All Real Estate (Industry Group) Gross Index on a rolling three year basis.Full Salt Salt Enhanced Property Fund profile →
Documents
Crawled directly from each manager's website. How we record provenance →
Mint
LiveLast verified 2026-05-08
Salt
Common questions
What's the difference between the Mint Australasian Property Fund and the Salt Enhanced Property Fund?
Which fund has lower fees, Mint Australasian Property Fund or Salt Enhanced Property Fund?
How do the 5-year returns compare?
Are both funds PIE-taxed in NZ?
Where can I read the official documents for these funds?
