Generate vs Fisher Funds KiwiSaver in NZ (2026): Two Big Active Schemes Compared

Generate vs Fisher Funds KiwiSaver compared: fees, fund range, scale and long-term performance, plus who each tends to suit and whether active fees are worth paying.

TL;DR: Generate and Fisher Funds are two of New Zealand's larger actively managed KiwiSaver schemes. Generate held about $7.94 billion in KiwiSaver and managed funds at 31 August 2025; ² Fisher Funds grew to roughly $22 billion total, including about $14 billion in KiwiSaver, after buying Kiwi Wealth. ⁴ Both charge active fees above index funds, so the real question is whether that fee earns its keep for you.

Generate vs Fisher Funds KiwiSaver is a common comparison because both sit in the same camp: active managers who research and pick investments rather than simply tracking an index, and who charge accordingly. They are often shortlisted together by people who have decided they want an active approach and now want to choose between two of the bigger names.

This guide compares them on the things that compound over a working lifetime — fees, fund range, scale and long-term performance — and asks the question that sits underneath it all: whether paying active fees at all is the right call for your goals. Figures are point-in-time and sourced; check current figures with each provider before acting.

How do Generate and Fisher Funds differ in style and scale?

Both are active managers, but they arrived at their current size by quite different routes, and that shapes how each one feels.

Generate launched as a KiwiSaver-focused specialist and grew steadily through strong inflows. By 31 August 2025 it managed about $7.94 billion across KiwiSaver and managed funds, which puts it among New Zealand's larger active providers. ² Its growth has been driven partly by members switching in: Generate reported about $660 million in net transfers in over the year to 30 June 2025, the second-highest of any provider. ³ It runs a focused, growth-oriented range built around its flagship growth fund.

Fisher Funds is an older, investment-led firm that scaled up sharply by acquiring the Kiwi Wealth KiwiSaver scheme. Combined, the business managed roughly $22 billion in total funds, including about $14 billion in KiwiSaver assets at the time of the acquisition. ⁴ That makes Fisher one of the largest active managers in the market by a clear margin. Both are genuinely active and growth-capable; the difference is one of size and history rather than one being active and the other not. For another active-versus-active matchup, see Milford vs Generate KiwiSaver.

What are Generate vs Fisher Funds fees in 2026?

Fees are the cost you control with the most certainty, and over decades they compound hard, so it pays to compare them on a like-for-like basis.

Both managers charge more than index funds, which is the deal with active management: you pay for the team and the attempt to outperform. Fisher Funds publishes fund charges of 1.13% on its KiwiSaver Plan Growth Fund and 1.01% on its Balanced Fund, with Conservative at 0.85% and Aggressive at 1.23%. ⁶ On Sorted's Smart Investor, the Fisher Funds Growth Fund shows total combined fees of about 1.46% over a year on a $30,000 balance — a 1.27% management charge plus 0.19% other charges, with no performance fee — against a growth-fund average around 1.30%. ⁵ Generate's Growth Fund runs at around 1.57% of your total investment plus a $36 annual membership fee, which places it among the higher-fee active growth options in New Zealand. ⁷

A couple of things are worth understanding about those numbers:

• Two ways of stating a fee. A provider's published fund-charge percentage and Sorted's standardised total can differ, because Sorted folds in everything on a common basis. Use one source for the comparison — the cleanest is Smart Investor, which combines each fund's charges into a single figure and lets you compare every KiwiSaver fund on the same footing. ⁵
• Membership fees add up at smaller balances. A flat dollar fee like Generate's $36 is a larger share of a small balance than a large one, so the all-in cost as a percentage is higher early on.

For more on how to weigh a fee against what you get for it, see KiwiSaver fees vs performance. The point is not that either is "expensive" in the abstract — it is that both cost more than index funds, and you should know each number and decide whether the active approach justifies it.

How do their fund ranges compare across risk levels?

Most people end up in a growth fund with one of these managers, but it is worth knowing the wider ladder, because the right fund type matters far more than the choice of provider.

Both Generate and Fisher Funds offer a range across the risk spectrum — broadly from conservative options through balanced settings to growth and aggressive funds — so a member can match their fund to their timeframe and risk tolerance and adjust it as life changes. Fisher Funds' published fund-charge table runs from a Cash fund at 0.44% and Core Conservative at 0.50% through Conservative, Balanced and Growth up to an Aggressive fund at 1.23%, plus a low-cost Default option at 0.37%. ⁶ Generate's range centres on its growth-oriented funds but also spans more conservative settings.

The honest summary is that either manager gives you enough choice to sit in a fund that fits you. The more important decision is which rung of the ladder you are on. A member in their twenties parked in a conservative fund, or someone near retirement still in an aggressive one, is likely affected far more by that mismatch than by any fee or style difference between Generate and Fisher Funds. Our guide to active vs passive KiwiSaver sets out the underlying trade-off.

How have their growth and balanced funds performed long term?

Fees only matter relative to what you keep, so performance is the other half of the picture — but it is the half people most often read wrongly.

A few rules make any return comparison meaningful:

• Match the risk category. Compare a Generate growth fund with a Fisher Funds growth fund, not with a balanced one. A fund holding more shares will usually look better in a strong sharemarket year and worse in a downturn, regardless of manager skill.
• Use after-fee, after-tax returns. That is what actually lands in your account, and it already nets off the higher active fee. Headline gross figures flatter higher-fee funds.
• Use long periods. One strong year tells you very little. KiwiSaver is a 30-to-40-year product, and active managers in particular can lead for a stretch and lag the next.

Rather than quote a single period here — which can mislead, and which would risk presenting one manager's best run as typical — the cleaner approach is to pull live, like-for-like figures from one independent source. Sorted's Smart Investor lets you compare standardised returns, fees and risk for every Generate and Fisher Funds fund on one screen, fund type by fund type. ⁵

The reason returns are the wrong sole metric is that past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance, and an active fund's recent lead can reverse. Returns are not guaranteed; the value of investments can go down as well as up, and you may get back less than you invested. Look at how each fund has done over the longest period available, against funds of the same risk type, on an after-fee, after-tax basis — then weigh that alongside fee, fund fit and your own timeframe rather than chasing whichever name topped a recent table.

What does Fisher's scale (post-Kiwi Wealth) add?

Scale is a fair thing to weigh, though it is easy to read more into it than it deserves.

Fisher Funds' acquisition of Kiwi Wealth lifted it to roughly $22 billion total, including about $14 billion in KiwiSaver — well ahead of Generate's roughly $7.94 billion across KiwiSaver and managed funds, and set against a system that held $123.1 billion across all NZ KiwiSaver schemes in the year ending March 2025. ¹²⁴ Greater scale can support a larger investment team, broader research, and the administrative resources to run accounts smoothly and weather change. It can also, in some cases, help spread fixed costs across more members.

What scale does not tell you is the after-fee return you will get. A larger manager is not automatically a better performer, and size says nothing about whether a fund suits your timeframe or whether its fee is justified for you. Generate's strong inflows — the second-highest net transfers in of any provider over the year to 30 June 2025 — show a smaller specialist can still attract members at pace. ³ Treat scale as reassurance about administration and continuity, not as evidence of the best outcome for your money.

Which saver suits Generate, and which suits Fisher Funds?

There is no universal answer here, and anyone who gives you one without knowing your situation is guessing. But it is fair to describe the kinds of savers each tends to appeal to.

People drawn to Generate often like a KiwiSaver-focused specialist with a growth-oriented range and a strong recent record of attracting members, and are comfortable that its growth fund sits at the higher end of the fee range. ³⁷ People drawn to Fisher Funds often value a larger, long-established investment firm with significant scale after the Kiwi Wealth acquisition and a published fund-charge schedule that is competitive within the active camp. ⁴⁶

Both are active managers charging active fees, so neither suits someone whose priority is the lowest possible cost — that points towards index funds instead. And neither suits someone who has not first settled the bigger questions: the right fund type for their timeframe, the correct PIR (Prescribed Investor Rate — the tax rate on your KiwiSaver earnings), and whether they are on track to claim the full government contribution. Personalised advice works through which manager, if either, fits you, rather than assuming a winner.

Are active fees justified versus an index alternative?

This is the question underneath the whole comparison, and it deserves a straight, balanced answer rather than a sales line either way.

The case for active management is that a skilled team may add value — by selecting investments well, managing risk through downturns, or adjusting the mix as conditions change — enough to justify the higher fee after costs. The case for index funds is blunt: they cost much less, and a fee saved is certain, whereas outperformance is not. An active fund has to beat its index by more than its extra fee, every year, just to leave you level. Some active funds have managed that over some periods; many have not, and which ones will in future cannot be known in advance.

Neither approach is right for everyone. Some people are comfortable paying an active fee for the chance of outperformance and active risk management; others prefer the low, certain cost of an index fund and accept market returns. What matters is going in with eyes open: an active fee is a real, compounding cost, and it buys an attempt, not a guarantee. Our guide to active vs passive KiwiSaver sets out both sides in full so you can decide which camp suits your goals before you pick a manager within it.

How do you switch between them without leaving the market?

Switching is simpler than most people expect, and you stay invested the whole time, so there is no need to "cash out" first.

The general process looks like this:

1. Choose your fund, not just the manager. Decide on the fund type that matches your timeframe and risk tolerance, then compare options on Smart Investor or with an adviser. ⁵

2. Apply to the new provider. You only ever sign up with the scheme you are moving to — Generate or Fisher Funds — and they arrange the transfer.

3. Your balance is transferred across. Your existing provider transfers your money to the new one. You keep all your KiwiSaver tax and contribution settings, and you remain invested through the move.

4. Update your contribution rate and PIR. Make sure your employer contributions redirect and that your new provider holds your correct PIR.

You can only hold one KiwiSaver account at a time, so switching providers does not exit you from KiwiSaver, and your contributions continue uninterrupted; the transfer also handles closing the old account. ¹⁰ There can be a short administrative period as money moves between funds; confirm the timing and whether any out-of-market gap concerns you.

Generate vs Fisher Funds: fees, funds and scale at a glance (2026)

_Source: Generate fund performance reporting; Fisher Funds fees and expenses page; Sorted Smart Investor; FMA KiwiSaver Annual Report 2025. ¹²⁴⁵⁶⁷ Not every active manager in the market is shown — compare both against other providers, and against index funds, on a like-for-like basis, and read each fund's PDS._

Frequently asked questions

Is Generate or Fisher Funds KiwiSaver better? Neither is universally better. Both are active managers running large schemes, and both charge more than index funds. Generate's growth fund sits at the higher end of the fee range at around 1.57% plus a $36 membership fee, while Fisher Funds' Growth Fund publishes a 1.13% charge (about 1.46% on a standardised Sorted basis). ⁵⁶⁷ The right choice depends on your timeframe, risk tolerance and fee priorities. Compare them fund type by fund type on Smart Investor before deciding. ⁵

Why do Generate and Fisher Funds cost more than index funds? Because both are active managers. They employ teams to research, select and adjust investments and try to beat the market, and you pay for that attempt. An index fund simply tracks the market at low cost and makes no such attempt. The active fee is a real, compounding cost, and it buys an attempt to outperform, not a guarantee. ⁵⁶⁷

How big is Fisher Funds after the Kiwi Wealth acquisition? Combined, the business managed roughly $22 billion in total funds, including about $14 billion in KiwiSaver assets at the time of the acquisition, making it one of New Zealand's largest active managers. ⁴ Greater scale can support a larger team and smooth administration, but it does not by itself mean a better after-fee return for you.

Does fund size affect my returns? Not directly. A larger manager is not automatically a better performer, and size says nothing about whether a fund suits your timeframe or whether its fee is justified. Generate, the smaller of the two, still recorded the second-highest net transfers in of any provider over the year to 30 June 2025. ³ Look at after-fee, after-tax returns over long periods within the same risk category instead.

How do I switch from one to the other without being out of the market? You apply only with the provider you are moving to, and they arrange the transfer; your balance moves across without you cashing out, and your KiwiSaver settings carry over. You can only hold one KiwiSaver account at a time, so switching does not exit you from KiwiSaver and contributions continue uninterrupted. ¹⁰ There can be a short administrative gap as money moves — confirm the timing with the new provider.

Will switching affect my government contribution or my contributions? No. Switching schemes does not change your eligibility for the government contribution or your employer contributions. If eligible, you can receive up to $260.72 per KiwiSaver year (25 cents per $1, halved from $521.43 on 1 July 2025) by contributing at least $1,042.86; members earning over $180,000 a year no longer qualify. ⁸ The minimum employee and employer rate was 3% as at August 2025, rising to 3.5% from 1 April 2026 — these settings are set by the Government and apply regardless of provider. ⁹

This article is general information only and is not personalised financial advice. It does not take into account your particular financial situation, goals or needs. Before acting, consider whether it's right for you and seek advice tailored to your circumstances. KiwiSaver is a long-term savings scheme; government contributions, contribution rates, withdrawal rules and tax (PIR) settings are set by the Government and can change, and figures here are correct as at 21 August 2025 — check current rules at ird.govt.nz, kiwisaver.govt.nz and sorted.org.nz, and the relevant scheme's Product Disclosure Statement. Returns are not guaranteed; the value of investments can go down as well as up, you may get back less than you invested, and past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance. Craig Smith Business Services Ltd (FSP712931), trading as Smiths Financial, holds a Class 2 licence issued by the Financial Markets Authority and is a member of the Financial Dispute Resolution Service (FDRS). Smiths Financial does not provide advice on mortgages, tax or legal structuring. Written by Henry Smith, Financial Adviser; reviewed by Craig Smith, Principal Adviser. Last reviewed 21 August 2025.