Highlights

  • Betashares Australia 200 ETF (ASX: A200) tracks the Solactive Australia 200 Index with a 0.04% management fee.
  • STW launched in August 2001 and holds around 200 securities in line with the benchmark.
  • All three ETFs list BHP Group and Commonwealth Bank among their largest positions.
  • Performance data on issuer pages shows returns across multiple standard timeframes versus the index.

 

Broad-market exchange traded funds tracking Australia’s flagship equity index are drawing attention as investors and traders position around movements in the ASX 200. Three of the most liquid vehicles — Betashares Australia 200 ETF (ASX:A200), iShares Core S&P/ASX 200 ETF (ASX:IOZ) and SPDR S&P/ASX 200 ETF (ASX:STW) — provide exposure to the same underlying benchmark while differing in structure, scale, and cost.

  1. A200: Low-Cost Access to Australia 200

Fund size (AUM): ~AUD 6.7 billion
Management fee (MER): 0.04% p.a.
Number of holdings: ~200
Inception date: 07 May 2018
Top holdings: BHP Group, Commonwealth Bank of Australia, CSL, National Australia Bank, Westpac Banking Corporation
NAV/unit: $153.75 (As at 27 February 2026)

The fund seeks to track the Solactive Australia 200 Index and holds a portfolio designed to reflect the largest listed companies in the domestic market. Sector and stock weights are aligned with the index methodology.

The fund delivered a 7.45% return over one year and a 10.41% annualised return over five years, as at 30 January 2026.

  1. IOZ: Core S&P/ASX 200 Exposure

Fund size (AUM): ~AUD 8.5 billion
Management fee (MER): 0.05% p.a.
Number of holdings: ~200
Inception date: January 2010
Top holdings: BHP Group, Commonwealth Bank of Australia, CSL, National Australia Bank, Westpac Banking Corporation
NAV as of 27-Feb-2026: AUD37.02

The ETF aims to replicate the S&P/ASX 200 Index and is positioned as a core allocation vehicle. The portfolio composition reflects index weightings, with financials and materials among the largest sectors due to benchmark concentration.

As at 31 January 2026, the fund delivered a 1-year return of 7.41%, a 3-year return of 9.74% p.a., a 5-year return of 10.15% p.a., a 10-year return of 10.01% p.a., and an since-inception return of 8.46% p.a

  1. STW: One of the Earliest ASX-Listed Index ETFs

Fund size (AUM): ~AUD 6,604.7M
Management fee (MER): 0.05% p.a.
Number of holdings: ~200
Inception date: 24 August 2001
Top holdings: BHP Group, Commonwealth Bank of Australia, CSL, National Australia Bank, Westpac Banking Corporation
NAV: AUD 82.65 as of 27 Feb 2026.

The fund tracks the S&P/ASX 200 Index and represents one of the longest-listed exchange traded funds on the Australian market. Its portfolio mirrors the benchmark, with holdings and sector allocations reflecting index construction.

As at 31 January 2026, the fund’s distribution return was 0.00% for one month, 0.89% for three months, 0.00% year-to-date, and 3.72% over one year.

Over the same period, the fund’s growth return was 1.77% for one month, -0.52% for three months, 1.77% year-to-date, and 3.68% for one year.

Same Benchmark, Different Structures

All three ETFs provide exposure to the ASX 200 and hold broadly similar constituents because they follow the same underlying index. Key points of differentiation on the fund pages include:

  • Variation in management costs
  • Differences in assets under management
  • Distinct inception dates
  • Slight structural and operational features

Performance tables on each page present returns over comparable periods alongside index outcomes.

Why Benchmark ETFs Are Seeing Attention

Activity in these funds often aligns with moves in the ASX 200, as they are used for broad market exposure and for implementing tactical positioning during periods of index momentum or volatility.

FAQs

  1. Do A200, IOZ and STW track different indices?
    No. All three track an Australia 200 / S&P/ASX 200-based benchmark representing the largest listed companies on the ASX.
  2. Why do the management fees differ?
    Each issuer sets its own cost structure, which is reflected in the management expense ratio shown on the fund page.
  3. Are the holdings different across the three ETFs?
    They are largely similar because they follow the same index, with differences mainly due to index replication and portfolio management processes.