IAF vs IGB: Which ETF Is Better?
A side-by-side comparison of fees, size, returns and holdings, using data to 30 September 2026.
IAF comes out ahead on 9 of 9 measures. Which matters most depends on you.
The short answer
Worth about $5,644 on $100,000 over 20 years.
Bigger funds usually trade more cheaply and are less likely to close.
IAF vs IGB side by side
| IAF leads on 9, IGB on 0 | IAFiShares Core Composite Bond ETF | IGBiShares Treasury ETF |
|---|---|---|
| The basics | ||
| Index tracked | Bloomberg AusBond Composite 0+ Yr Index | Bloomberg AusBond Treasury 0+ Yr Index |
| Fund manager | iShares | iShares |
| Asset class | Australian bonds | Australian bonds |
| Listed | Mar 2012 | Mar 2012 |
| Cost and size | ||
| MERyearly fee, lower is better | 0.10%✓ | 0.18% |
| AUMfund size | $3.7bn✓ | $355m |
| Net flows (Sep)new money in, last month | −$15m✓ | −$81m |
| Bid/ask spreadtrading cost, lower is better | 0.02% | 0.04% |
| Total returns | ||
| 1 month | −0.7%✓ | −0.9% |
| 1 year | −0.4%✓ | −1.1% |
| 3 years p.a. | +3.4%✓ | +2.8% |
| 5 years p.a. | −0.2%✓ | −0.8% |
| $10,000 invested | ||
| 1 year ago | $9,960✓ | $9,894 |
| 5 years ago | $9,912✓ | $9,596 |
✓ marks the better figure on each measure. Returns include distributions, to 30 September 2026.
IAF vs IGB price chart
Both ETFs on one chart as % change. Use the 1D to All buttons to change the period. Price only, so it leaves out distributions · TradingView
What $10,000 invested is worth now
$10,000 put into IAF 5 years ago is worth $9,912 today, against $9,596 in IGB. That is $316 more in IAF.
Total returns to 30 September 2026, with distributions reinvested, before tax and brokerage. The price chart above leaves out distributions, so it can look worse. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.
What the fees cost you
IAF's lower fee leaves about $5,644 more in your pocket over 20 years.
Total fees paid on a $100,000 investment, assuming a 7% a year return before fees. Illustration only: it ignores tax, brokerage and differences in returns.
IAF and IGB overlap
1 companies appear in both funds. Overlap is the share of the portfolio that is the same in both, counting the smaller weight of each shared company.
| Biggest shared holdings | % of IAF | % of IGB |
|---|---|---|
| 100.00% | 100.00% |
Add more ETFs and see the overlap in Compare ETFs →
Best-endeavours estimate. Built from each issuer's published holdings, which may be weeks or months old, may cover only part of a fund (some publish only their top 10) and are matched by company name. Figures may be incomplete or inaccurate. Check the issuer's website and PDS before relying on them. General information only.
Get the full IAF vs IGB report
- Every holding of each ETF: the top 50 companies, with sectors and countries
- Exactly which companies they share, and how much of each
- Fees in dollars over 10, 20 and 30 years
- Every metric side by side, including the index each tracks
- ★ FREE BONUSIs now a good time to invest? The Market Health-O-Meter
FAQs
Which is better, IAF or IGB?
It depends on what you need. On our numbers IAF wins on 9 measures and IGB on 0. IAF is cheaper, with a management fee of 0.10% vs 0.18%. On $100,000 over 20 years that difference is worth about $5,644. IAF is the larger fund at $3.7bn vs $355m. IAF has the better 1-year return: −0.4% vs −1.1%.
Which is cheaper, IAF or IGB?
IAF charges 0.10% a year and IGB charges 0.18% a year.
Can I hold both IAF and IGB?
You can, but check how much they overlap. IAF is a Australian bonds fund and IGB is a Australian bonds fund.
More comparisons
General information only, not a recommendation. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.