IHWL vs HETH: Which ETF Is Better?
A side-by-side comparison of fees, size, returns and holdings, using data to 30 September 2026.
IHWL comes out ahead on 10 of 10 measures. Which matters most depends on you.
The short answer
Worth about $33,165 on $100,000 over 20 years.
Bigger funds usually trade more cheaply and are less likely to close.
A tighter gap between the buy and sell price.
IHWL vs HETH side by side
| IHWL leads on 10, HETH on 0 | IHWLiShares Core MSCI World ex Australia ESG Leaders ETF | HETHBetashares Global Sustainability Leaders Ch ETF |
|---|---|---|
| The basics | ||
| Index tracked | MSCI World Ex Australia Custom ESG Leaders Index | Nasdaq Future Global Sustainability Leaders Index, hedged to AUD |
| Fund manager | iShares | Betashares |
| Asset class | International shares | International shares |
| Listed | Apr 2016 | Jul 2020 |
| Cost and size | ||
| MERyearly fee, lower is better | 0.13%✓ | 0.62% |
| AUMfund size | $1.1bn✓ | $725m |
| Net flows (Sep)new money in, last month | $11m✓ | −$3.2m |
| Bid/ask spreadtrading cost, lower is better | 0.05%✓ | 0.13% |
| Total returns | ||
| 1 month | −0.6%✓ | −1.7% |
| 1 year | +17.1%✓ | +14.2% |
| 3 years p.a. | +20.3%✓ | +16.4% |
| 5 years p.a. | +11.0%✓ | +7.9% |
| $10,000 invested | ||
| 1 year ago | $11,709✓ | $11,422 |
| 5 years ago | $16,862✓ | $14,606 |
✓ marks the better figure on each measure. Returns include distributions, to 30 September 2026.
IHWL vs HETH 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 IHWL 5 years ago is worth $16,862 today, against $14,606 in HETH. That is $2,256 more in IHWL.
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
IHWL's lower fee leaves about $33,165 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.
IHWL and HETH overlap
79 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 IHWL | % of HETH |
|---|---|---|
| 10.60% | 3.93% | |
| 2.56% | 3.04% | |
| 1.55% | 4.58% | |
| 1.38% | 3.22% | |
| 1.17% | 1.30% | |
| 1.17% | 4.20% | |
| 0.74% | 2.94% | |
| 0.70% | 1.49% | |
| 0.67% | 1.42% | |
| 0.67% | 1.57% | |
| 0.67% | 0.89% | |
| 0.64% | 0.86% |
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 IHWL vs HETH 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, IHWL or HETH?
It depends on what you need. On our numbers IHWL wins on 10 measures and HETH on 0. IHWL is cheaper, with a management fee of 0.13% vs 0.62%. On $100,000 over 20 years that difference is worth about $33,165. IHWL is the larger fund at $1.1bn vs $725m. IHWL has the better 1-year return: +17.1% vs +14.2%.
Which is cheaper, IHWL or HETH?
IHWL charges 0.13% a year and HETH charges 0.62% a year.
Can I hold both IHWL and HETH?
You can, but check how much they overlap. IHWL is a international shares fund and HETH is a international shares fund.
More comparisons
General information only, not a recommendation. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.