βš”οΈ Head to head

IOZ vs MQAE: Which ETF Is Better?

A side-by-side comparison of fees, size, returns and holdings, using data to 30 September 2026.

IOZ comes out ahead on 5 of 7 measures. Which matters most depends on you.

The short answer

πŸ’ΈLower feeMQAE wins
IOZ
0.05%
MQAE
0.03%

Worth about $1,436 on $100,000 over 20 years.

🏦Bigger fundIOZ wins
IOZ
$9.7bn
MQAE
$1.3bn

Bigger funds usually trade more cheaply and are less likely to close.

πŸ“ˆ1-year returnIOZ wins
IOZ
+2.6%
MQAE
+1.6%
πŸ“Š3-year returnToo close to call
IOZ
+10.8% a yr
MQAE
–
🏁5-year returnToo close to call
IOZ
+6.8% a yr
MQAE
–
βš–οΈCheaper to tradeIOZ wins
IOZ
0.04%
MQAE
0.11%

A tighter gap between the buy and sell price.

IOZ vs MQAE side by side

IOZ leads on 5, MQAE on 2IOZiShares Core S&P/ASX 200 ETFMQAEMacquarie Core Australian Equity Active ETF
The basics
Index trackedS&P/ASX 200 IndexSee the PDS
Fund manageriSharesMacquarie
Asset classAustralian sharesAustralian shares
ListedDec 2010May 2024
Cost and size
MERyearly fee, lower is better0.05%0.03%βœ“
AUMfund size$9.7bnβœ“$1.3bn
Net flows (Sep)new money in, last month$321mβœ“$63m
Bid/ask spreadtrading cost, lower is better0.04%βœ“0.11%
Total returns
1 monthβˆ’2.4%βˆ’1.7%βœ“
1 year+2.6%βœ“+1.6%
3 years p.a.+10.8%–
5 years p.a.+6.8%–
$10,000 invested
1 year ago$10,262βœ“$10,155
5 years ago$13,895–

βœ“ marks the better figure on each measure. Returns include distributions, to 30 September 2026.

IOZ vs MQAE 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 Β· TradingView

πŸ“ˆ Growth

What $10,000 invested is worth now

Only IOZ has a 5 years record: $10,000 then is worth $13,895 today.

IOZMQAE$10,000 invested
$0k$4k$8k$12k$16k$10.3k$10.2k1 year agoIOZ +$107$13.6ktoo new3 years ago$13.9ktoo new5 years ago

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.

πŸ’Έ Cost

What the fees cost you

MQAE's lower fee leaves about $1,436 more in your pocket over 20 years.

IOZ charges 0.05% a yearMQAE charges 0.03% a year
🧾 Fees paid on $100,000Saving
5 years
IOZ
βˆ’$327
MQAE
βˆ’$197
You keep$131more with MQAE
10 years
IOZ
βˆ’$917
MQAE
βˆ’$551
You keep$366more with MQAE
20 years
IOZ
βˆ’$3,601
MQAE
βˆ’$2,164
You keep$1,436more with MQAE

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.

Free PDF report

Get the full IOZ vs MQAE 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
  • β˜… FREE BONUSIs now a good time to invest? The Market Health-O-Meter
⬇ Get the free report
Joshua Stega
etfadviserExchange traded fund specialist adviser Β· 20 years’ experience
Keep in touch with the marketsWeekly ETF research, the Market Health-O-Meter and our model portfolio.Try it free for 30 days β†’

FAQs

Which is better, IOZ or MQAE?

It depends on what you need. On our numbers IOZ wins on 5 measures and MQAE on 2. MQAE is cheaper, with a management fee of 0.03% vs 0.05%. On $100,000 over 20 years that difference is worth about $1,436. IOZ is the larger fund at $9.7bn vs $1.3bn. IOZ has the better 1-year return: +2.6% vs +1.6%.

Which is cheaper, IOZ or MQAE?

IOZ charges 0.05% a year and MQAE charges 0.03% a year.

Can I hold both IOZ and MQAE?

You can, but check how much they overlap. IOZ is a Australian shares fund and MQAE is a Australian shares fund.

More comparisons

VAS vs IOZA200 vs IOZIOZ vs STWIOZ vs E200IOZ vs OZRIOZ vs DACEIOZ vs DAVAIOZ vs QOZIOZ vs FAIRIOZ vs ILCIOZ vs AASFIOZ vs SFYIOZ vs VETHIOZ vs IESGIOZ vs ATECIOZ vs MVE

Add more ETFs to this comparison β†’

General information only, not a recommendation. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.