Choosing a REIT ETF can feel like choosing between two baskets of the same properties. There is plenty of overlap here, but the baskets are not identical. The useful question is how much Singapore exposure, concentration and convenience you want.
Lion-Phillip S-REIT ETF focuses on Singapore-listed REITs. Amova-StraitsTrading Asia ex Japan REIT Index ETF, formerly known as the NikkoAM-StraitsTrading fund, adds regional REIT exposure. This updates the original comparison while keeping the same article URL.
Checked 12 October 2026. Holdings and the comparable return tables use 31 August 2026. Newer standalone figures are clearly dated.
At a glance
| Feature | Lion-Phillip | Amova (formerly NikkoAM) |
|---|---|---|
| SGX counter | CLR (SGD) | CFA (SGD); COI (USD) |
| Benchmark | Morningstar Singapore REIT Yield Focus Index | FTSE EPRA Nareit Asia ex Japan REITs 10% Capped Index |
| Focus | Singapore-listed REITs | Asia ex Japan REITs |
| Launch | 30 October 2017 | 29 March 2017 |
| Annual fund expenses | 0.60% (year ended 31 December 2025) | 0.55% capped total expense ratio |
| Approximate cost per S$10,000 a year | S$60 | S$55 |
| Management fee, included in fund costs | 0.50% | 0.50% |
| Distribution schedule | Half-yearly | Quarterly |
| Fund assets, 31 August 2026 | S$880.04 million | S$726.30 million |
| Holdings count | 19 securities, excluding cash, counted from factsheet | Total count not stated in the factsheet |
| Trading unit | 1 unit | 1 unit |
The expense ratio includes more than the management fee, so do not add the two together. These dollar costs assume an unchanged S$10,000 balance and exclude brokerage and other trading charges. A five-dollar annual difference is small; the investments inside the fund matter much more.
Neither payout schedule guarantees an amount. A distribution is cash leaving the fund, and its value normally falls accordingly, all else equal. A higher distribution yield can also follow a falling unit price. I have removed the old 2020 yields because they are not current, comparable income measures.
Lion-Phillip top 10 holdings
| Holding | Weight |
|---|---|
| CapitaLand Integrated Commercial Trust | 10.04% |
| CapitaLand Ascendas REIT | 9.58% |
| Mapletree Logistics Trust | 9.54% |
| Keppel DC REIT | 9.36% |
| Mapletree Pan Asia Commercial Trust | 9.21% |
| Keppel REIT | 8.10% |
| Mapletree Industrial Trust | 7.69% |
| Frasers Logistics & Commercial Trust | 7.30% |
| Suntec REIT | 6.90% |
| Frasers Centrepoint Trust | 5.81% |
| Combined top 10 | 83.53% |
Amova top 10 holdings
| Holding | Weight |
|---|---|
| Link REIT | 10.40% |
| CapitaLand Integrated Commercial Trust | 10.10% |
| CapitaLand Ascendas REIT | 9.60% |
| Embassy Office Parks REIT | 5.60% |
| Keppel DC REIT | 4.70% |
| Mapletree Industrial Trust | 4.40% |
| Mapletree Logistics Trust | 4.40% |
| Keppel REIT | 3.50% |
| Suntec REIT | 3.40% |
| Mapletree Pan Asia Commercial Trust | 3.20% |
| Combined top 10 | 59.30% |
Eight names appear in both top-10 lists. That is useful evidence of overlap, but it is not an exact overlap percentage for their entire portfolios. Lion-Phillip’s largest ten positions account for 83.53%, compared with 59.30% for Amova. Buying both therefore adds some regional exposure while also buying more of several familiar REITs.
Country allocation: listing is not property location
| Country / category | Lion-Phillip | Amova |
|---|---|---|
| Singapore | 97.57%* | 65.0% |
| Hong Kong | — | 13.0% |
| India | — | 8.3% |
| Malaysia | — | 5.1% |
| South Korea | — | 2.9% |
| Philippines | — | 2.4% |
| Other countries | — | 2.2% |
| Cash / other residual | 2.43% cash equivalents | 1.3% cash and/or derivatives |
A Singapore-listed REIT can own warehouses, offices or shopping centres overseas. So the Singapore row does not mean all the rent comes from Singapore. Currency movements and overseas property markets can affect both funds, even when you buy their SGD counters. A USD trading counter is also not a separate promise of currency protection.
Property sectors inside the funds
| Lion-Phillip category | Weight |
|---|---|
| Industrial | 35.57% |
| Office | 20.92% |
| Retail | 17.53% |
| Specialized | 10.42% |
| Diversified | 7.34% |
| Hotel & resort | 3.42% |
| Health care | 2.37% |
| Cash equivalents | 2.43% |
| Amova category | Weight |
|---|---|
| Industrial REITs | 25.1% |
| Retail REITs | 23.9% |
| Diversified REITs | 21.4% |
| Office REITs | 15.8% |
| Data centre REITs | 5.3% |
| Hotel & resort REITs | 3.7% |
| Others | 3.4% |
| Cash and/or derivatives | 1.3% |
The sector tables are separate because the providers use different categories. “Specialized” should not automatically be treated as identical to “data centre”. Both baskets remain concentrated in real estate, even though they spread money across different property types.
Performance over matching periods
The following comparison uses SGD NAV total returns through 31 August 2026, with distributions reinvested. NAV means the value of the fund’s assets per unit. The figures reflect fund expenses, before your personal taxes and brokerage costs. Returns over more than one year are annualised: an average compounded rate, not a gain earned every year.
| Period | Lion-Phillip | Amova |
|---|---|---|
| 2026 YTD | −3.3% | Not published in retrieved August factsheet |
| 1 year | 1.1% | 1.04% |
| 3 years, annualised | 2.7% | 3.51% |
| 5 years, annualised | −0.6% | −1.69% |
| 10 years | Not yet available | Not yet available |
Amova’s product page has newer returns through 30 September 2026, but combining them with Lion-Phillip’s August figures would compare different periods. The table deliberately uses the latest common factsheet date available in this check. Since-inception returns are excluded because the funds launched on different dates.
What would S$10,000 have grown to?
| Separate investment period | Lion-Phillip | Amova |
|---|---|---|
| 1 year | S$10,110 | S$10,104 |
| 3 years | S$10,832 | S$11,090 |
| 5 years | S$9,704 | S$9,183 |
Why there is no five-year annual-return table
The retrieved official factsheets did not provide a complete, matching set of calendar-year NAV total returns for 2021–2025. I have left that table out rather than substitute price-only returns or mix provider methods. This also means the comparison cannot show the full year-by-year path of losses and recoveries.
Buying and managing the investment
Both ETFs trade on SGX through a broker with access to the relevant counter. Check brokerage minimums and the gap between buying and selling prices, especially for small monthly investments. A regular savings plan may automate purchases, but availability and charges depend on the platform; the old platform list should not be treated as current.
Both providers describe SRS access. Amova’s factsheet also lists CPFIS-OA access subject to eligibility. Check the current rules and procedures with your broker or scheme operator before using retirement savings. The tradeable one-unit minimum does not mean a very small order is economical after charges.
Which fund fits the role?
| Priority | What to consider |
|---|---|
| A focused basket of Singapore-listed REITs | Lion-Phillip is the more concentrated option in this snapshot. |
| Regional REIT exposure in one fund | Amova spreads part of the portfolio beyond Singapore, while retaining substantial Singapore exposure. |
| More frequent scheduled cash payments | Amova pays quarterly; Lion-Phillip pays half-yearly. Amounts remain variable. |
| Less real-estate risk in an existing portfolio | Neither solves that by itself. Consider your total exposure, including individual REITs and other property investments. |
The risks deserve as much attention as the payout. Higher borrowing costs can squeeze a REIT’s cash flow. Vacancies, weaker rents, refinancing problems and falling property values can reduce both income and unit prices. An ETF spreads individual-company risk, but a troubled holding can still hurt the fund and the whole sector can fall together.
There is no automatic winner here. Start with the portfolio role, then compare concentration, geography and total costs. A familiar name or a slightly higher past yield is not enough reason to choose one.
Updated 12 October 2026. This article provides general information, not personal investment advice. Sources and measurement dates are shown beneath the tables.
