TAIWAN ETF COMPARISON
00891 vs 00910
CTBC Taiwan ESG Leading Semiconductor ETF compared with FSITC Aerospace and Satellite ETF.
Four ways to read this comparison
Portfolio similarity, historical return, distribution yield and annual fund cost answer different questions.
Price and return trend
Normalized returns make funds with different unit prices comparable. Switch to price mode to view actual TWD prices.
Key metrics
| Metric | 00891 CTBC Taiwan ESG Leading Semiconductor ETF | 00910 FSITC Aerospace and Satellite ETF |
|---|---|---|
| Latest close | TWD 35.07 | TWD 52.90 |
| Assets under management | TWD 71.4B | TWD 5.8B |
| Beneficiaries | 204,138 | 37,027 |
| Trailing 12-month distribution yield | 11.83% | — |
| Total expense ratio | — | — |
| Management fee | 0.40% | 0.90% |
| Custody fee | 0.04% | 0.23% |
Performance and risk
| Metric | 00891 | 00910 |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | +101.85% | +26.22% |
| 3-year return | +202.43% | +261.59% |
| 5-year return | +177.78% | — |
| 1-year volatility | 36.12% | 46.20% |
| 1-year max drawdown | -22.88% | -43.26% |
| 1-year Sharpe ratio | 2.4 | 0.5 |
Returns are price returns. Risk statistics use the available one-year price history and are shown only when sufficient observations exist.
Sector allocation
Weights are based on the latest available disclosed portfolios.
Common holdings
0 securities appear in both disclosed portfolios. Data updated Oct 29, 2026.
No data is currently available.
Holdings unique to each ETF
These securities appear in one disclosed portfolio but not the other.
| # | Security | 00891 weight |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2330 · 2330 | 41.82% |
| 2 | 2454 · 2454 | 11.77% |
| 3 | 3711 · 3711 | 4.89% |
| 4 | 3653 · 3653 | 3.13% |
| 5 | 3443 · 3443 | 3.11% |
| 6 | 5274 · 5274 | 3.08% |
| 7 | 2344 · 2344 | 2.89% |
| 8 | 2303 · 2303 | 2.84% |
| 9 | 7769 · 7769 | 2.44% |
| 10 | 6223 · 6223 | 2.24% |
| 11 | 2379 · 2379 | 2.09% |
| 12 | 3034 · 3034 | 1.83% |
| 13 | 2408 · 2408 | 1.81% |
| 14 | 2449 · 2449 | 1.70% |
| 15 | 3661 · 3661 | 1.66% |
| 16 | 3081 · 3081 | 1.22% |
| 17 | 6488 · 6488 | 1.12% |
| 18 | 3105 · 3105 | 1.09% |
| 19 | 6239 · 6239 | 1.04% |
| 20 | 5347 · 5347 | 1.01% |
| 21 | 3702 · 3702 | 0.96% |
| 22 | 3529 · 3529 | 0.94% |
| 23 | 6415 · 6415 | 0.94% |
| 24 | 3036 · 3036 | 0.89% |
| 25 | 6147 · 6147 | 0.66% |
Fund profile and disclosure dates
| Metric | 00891 | 00910 |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | — | First Securities Investment Trust |
| Tracking index / benchmark | — | — |
| Listing date | May 28, 2021 | Jul 20, 2022 |
| Latest market date | Oct 29, 2026 | Oct 29, 2026 |
| Holdings date | Oct 29, 2026 | Oct 28, 2026 |
| Eligible stock positions | 30 | 30 |
| Premium / discount | +0.20% | -0.20% |
Switching estimate
Estimate how many units of the other ETF the current market value could purchase.
0089100910
Current market valueTWD 350.7K
Unrealized gain / lossTWD 0
Estimated 00910 units6,629
Estimated annual distribution changeTWD -41.5K
This estimate excludes brokerage fees, taxes, bid-ask spreads and intraday price movement.
Continue researching this pair
Review each ETF independently or open another published comparison.
Taiwan ETF comparison FAQ
What does portfolio overlap measure?
For each common security, ETF Info takes the smaller of the two portfolio weights and adds those amounts. A higher percentage indicates more similar disclosed stock allocation.
Are historical returns shown with distributions?
Use the label shown for each metric. The long-period return fields are based on the return dataset, while the interactive price chart shows price returns and excludes distributions.
Can the lower-fee or higher-return ETF be considered the winner?
No single metric determines suitability. Fees, risk, liquidity, tracking exposure, distributions and portfolio construction answer different questions.
How to use this comparison
Fees, historical returns and overlap answer different questions. Portfolio overlap shows how similar the latest disclosed holdings are; it does not predict future performance or account for every trading cost, tax or distribution policy.