Over three years to 30 September 2026, the Global X fund came out ahead in five of seven matchups, including uranium, robotics, copper and batteries. Betashares won cybersecurity (HACK) and hedged gold (QAU), and it is far larger overall: $77 billion against $17 billion. Fees are similar, usually 0.45% to 0.70%. These are high-risk satellite funds, and last year's winner has often been next year's laggard.
Who are Global X and Betashares?
Global X started in New York and built its name on niche, thematic ETFs. Its Australian business, formerly ETF Securities, runs 60 ASX-listed funds and $17.3 billion. Its biggest fund is not a theme at all but physical gold: GOLD holds $5.8 billion.
Betashares is Australian and runs 109 ETFs and $77.3 billion, the second-largest range on the ASX. It covers both plain core funds such as A200 and a long list of themes, starting with NDQ, its Nasdaq 100 fund.
Global X vs Betashares at a glance
The seven matchups in one table
| Theme | Global X / Betashares | Fees | 1 year | 3 years | Size |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chips vs Nasdaq | SEMI / NDQ | 0.45% / 0.48% | +109.0% / +16.6% | +286.5% / +89.5% | $1.1bn / $9.5bn |
| Uranium | ATOM / URNM | 0.69% / 0.69% | −18.9% / −15.0% | +46.3% / +10.8% | $136m / $324m |
| Robotics | ROBO / RBTZ | 0.69% / 0.57% | +17.6% / −4.9% | +51.5% / +31.6% | $323m / $294m |
| Copper and metals | WIRE / XMET | 0.65% / 0.69% | +38.1% / +26.2% | +124.8% / +99.2% | $916m / $140m |
| Batteries vs climate | ACDC / ERTH | 0.69% / 0.65% | +16.3% / +1.0% | +56.0% / +7.3% | $604m / $78m |
| Cybersecurity | BUGG / HACK | 0.47% / 0.67% | +20.4% / +25.8% | +71.1% / +105.1% | $25m / $1.7bn |
| Gold | GOLD / QAU | 0.40% / 0.59% | +1.7% / +6.3% | +104.8% / +111.6% | $5.8bn / $1.2bn |
Cumulative total returns to 30 September 2026. Fund size in Australian dollars. Source: TMX Australia monthly funds report.
Return gap in the like-for-like pairs
Chips vs Nasdaq: SEMI vs NDQ
Not a true like-for-like, but this is the choice many investors face. SEMI holds about 30 semiconductor companies. NDQ holds the 100 biggest Nasdaq companies, including the same chip makers alongside Apple, Microsoft and Amazon. Only 28% of their holdings overlap. The AI chip boom made SEMI one of the best-performing ETFs on the ASX: $10,000 became $38,654 in three years. NDQ turned $10,000 into $18,955 with far less concentration. SEMI is a focused bet; NDQ is broad tech. See also NDQ vs FANG.
Uranium, robotics, copper and batteries
- Uranium: ATOM vs URNM. Same 0.69% fee. ATOM holds a wider spread of the nuclear industry; URNM is more focused on miners. ATOM is ahead by 35 points over three years, but both fell 15% to 19% in the past year. A reminder of how fast this theme turns. Compare URNM vs ATOM.
- Robotics: ROBO vs RBTZ. RBTZ is cheaper at 0.57%, but ROBO has returned more over one, three and five years. Over five years ROBO is up 26.1%; RBTZ is slightly down. Compare ROBO vs RBTZ.
- Copper and metals: WIRE vs XMET. WIRE is a pure copper miner fund; XMET spreads across copper, lithium, nickel and rare earths. WIRE is ahead over both periods and is more than six times the size.
- Batteries vs climate: ACDC vs ERTH. Loose peers. ACDC targets the battery and lithium chain; ERTH is broad climate innovation. ACDC has been far stronger: up 58.5% over five years while ERTH fell 24.4%.
Cybersecurity: BUGG vs HACK
Here Betashares wins. HACK has been the default cybersecurity ETF since 2016 and holds $1.7 billion. BUGG is 0.20% a year cheaper but holds only $25 million, which means wider buy and sell prices on the ASX. HACK returned 105.1% over three years against 71.1% for BUGG. Compare HACK vs BUGG or see all cybersecurity ETFs.
Gold: GOLD vs QAU
GOLD is unhedged physical gold, so its price in Australian dollars includes the currency move. QAU is hedged, so it tracks the US dollar gold price. With the Australian dollar rising last year, QAU won by 4.6 points over one year. Over five years unhedged GOLD was ahead, 144.5% against 116.9%. Global X also offers GXLD at just 0.15%, one of the cheapest gold funds listed. Compare GOLD vs QAU or browse gold ETFs.
What $10,000 grew to over three years
How much do the pairs overlap?
Less than you might expect. Two funds with the same theme can hold quite different companies, which is why their returns diverge so much.
How much of each pair is the same
How to use these funds sensibly
- Keep them small. Thematic funds suit a satellite slice, often 5% to 10% of a portfolio, around a core of broad Australian and global shares.
- Expect big swings. ATOM and URNM both fell by double digits last year after strong gains. A theme that has tripled can halve.
- Check size and spread. Funds under about $50 million, such as BUGG, can be costlier to trade.
- Avoid doubling up. SEMI, NDQ and a global shares fund all hold Nvidia and Broadcom. Check with the overlap calculator.
For more ideas, see our guides to every theme ETF on the ASX and the Vanguard vs Betashares matchups. Browse the full Global X and Betashares ranges.
Common questions
Is Global X or Betashares better?
For thematic funds, Global X has returned more in five of our seven matchups over three years. Betashares is much larger, has a broader range including cheap core funds, and won in cybersecurity and hedged gold. Compare fund by fund.
Is SEMI better than NDQ?
SEMI has returned far more over three years (286.5% vs 89.5%) but holds only about 30 chip companies, so it is much more concentrated. NDQ is broader tech. They do different jobs.
Which uranium ETF is best, ATOM or URNM?
Both charge 0.69%. ATOM is ahead over three years and holds a broader slice of the nuclear industry; URNM is larger and more focused on miners. Both fell over the past year.
Are thematic ETFs a good long-term investment?
Some themes have done very well, others poorly: ERTH lost 24% over five years. They suit a small satellite allocation for investors comfortable with large ups and downs.
Joshua Stega is a financial adviser with 20 years' experience and the founder of ETF Adviser. He built ReviewETF to make every Australian ETF easy to find and compare.
General information only. It does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. Consider the PDS and TMD before investing. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance. Data as at 30 September 2026.