NZ Funds Global Utilities vs Pathfinder Global Water Fund

The most material structural difference between these two funds is their asset allocation and, by extension, their income-versus-growth profile. The Pathfinder Global Water Fund holds 98.31% in growth assets, making it essentially a pure-equity vehicle. NZ Funds Global Utilities sits at 78.48% growth assets, with the remaining allocation implying a meaningful defensive or income component — and notably, its top five holdings include Goldman Sachs Futures, signalling active use of derivatives that Pathfinder's disclosed holdings do not reflect.

Fee structures diverge significantly: Pathfinder charges an annual fund charge of 1.30%, while NZ Funds Global Utilities charges 2.53% — nearly double. Both carry a risk indicator of 5 out of 7, so disclosed risk ratings do not differentiate them, even though their underlying construction differs.

On performance, Pathfinder reports a five-year annualised return of 6.99%. NZ Funds Global Utilities does not disclose a five-year return in this snapshot, likely because the fund lacks sufficient history; investors cannot make a like-for-like return comparison on currently available data.

Thematically, Pathfinder concentrates on water infrastructure and treatment companies (Pentair, Veolia, Xylem), whereas NZ Funds targets broader global utilities including European renewable energy operators (Fortum, Verbund, Ørsted, EDP). Fund sizes are closely matched at approximately NZD 63.3 million and NZD 62.2 million respectively.

Always verify these figures against each fund's current Product Disclosure Statement and latest Quarterly Fund Update on FMA Disclose before relying on them for any investment decision.