Which ASX ETF Categories Are Leading? All 403 Exchange Traded Products Ranked

Written by Christopher Hall, AdvDipFP | Authorised Representative, AFSL 526688 | Updated July 2026

Data current as of week ending 21 July 2026. This page is updated every week.

The ASX ETF categories leading the market depend entirely on whether performance is measured by breadth or by leadership. Across all 403 ASX-listed exchange traded products sorted into the 21 categories the exchange itself publishes, Equity – Global recorded the strongest average across every fund in the group over the quarter to 21 July 2026 at +5.72%. Measured instead by each category's three strongest funds, Equity – Global Sectors led at +35.46%. This page ranks every category on both measures each week, keeps the running record of which category has led most often, and explains what the gap between the two numbers reveals.

What Are the 21 ASX ETF Categories, and How Are They Ranked?

The ASX ETF categories are the 21 groupings the exchange applies to every quoted exchange traded product in its monthly Exchange Traded Product report — spanning Australian and global equity, property, fixed income, cash, mixed asset, currency, commodity and crypto. The taxonomy is the exchange's, not ours, which is what makes it a neutral frame for comparison.

Each category is measured two ways across four rolling periods — one week, one month, one quarter and one year:

• All-member average (breadth) — the equal-weighted mean return of every fund in the category reporting data for that period.

• Top-3 average (leadership) — the mean return of the three strongest funds in that category for that period.

Two measures are necessary because a category is not a single instrument. Equity – Global Sectors alone holds 79 funds spanning cybersecurity, semiconductors, gold miners, uranium, hydrogen and biotech. One average across all 79 describes none of them.

Method. 403 actively classified exchange traded products as at 21 July 2026, from the weekly ASX ETP performance export. Eleven individual company shares in the watchlist were excluded as not being exchange traded products. A fund with no reported return for a period is excluded from that period only, never counted as zero. All figures are equal-weighted — no fund is weighted by size. Nineteen of the 21 categories had constituents this week.

Which ASX ETF Categories Led This Week?

Equity – Global Sectors produced the strongest leadership figure while Equity – Global led on breadth. The two measures name different winners, and each answers a different question.

Category	Funds	Breadth Q%	Leadership Q%
Equity – Global Sectors	79	+1.97	+35.46
Equity – Asia	17	+5.03	+14.69
Equity – Global Strategy	86	+3.61	+12.59
Equity – Global	34	+5.72	+11.04
Equity – Emerging Markets	9	+5.42	+8.32
Equity – Australia Strategy	27	−0.50	+4.94
Mixed Asset	16	+2.62	+4.21
Equity – Infrastructure	7	+2.72	+3.75
Fixed Income – Australian Dollar	43	+1.18	+1.95
Equity – Australia	10	−0.62	+0.25
Equity – Australia Small/Mid Cap	9	−3.04	−1.22
Commodity	13	−14.81	−3.37
Crypto Assets	5	−13.32	−12.51

All figures cover the 13-week rolling period to 21 July 2026, equal-weighted across the funds in each category reporting data.

The funds carrying that figure were BUGG, HACK and SEMI — two cybersecurity funds and a semiconductor fund, named as evidence for the category's number rather than as a ranking of funds. The individual-fund view is maintained in the weekly ASX ETF rankings, and the cybersecurity drivers in the cybersecurity ETF comparison.

Every Australian equity category was negative over the quarter while every broad global equity category was positive. Over shorter windows the picture inverts: Crypto Assets led both weekly measures, at +4.07% breadth and +4.56% leadership, yet sat at −13.32% over the quarter — a category can be the week's strongest and the quarter's weakest at once.

A leading category is a momentum observation, not an endorsement. A high ranking records price movement that has already occurred over a defined period. It carries no assessment of merit, value or suitability.

Why Does a Category's Average Hide Its Strongest Funds?

The broader a category, the less its average describes anything inside it. The five widest gaps between leadership and breadth this week:

Category	Breadth Q%	Leadership Q%	Gap (pp)
Equity – Global Sectors	+1.97	+35.46	33.5
Commodity	−14.81	−3.37	11.4
Equity – Asia	+5.03	+14.69	9.7
Equity – Global Strategy	+3.61	+12.59	9.0
Equity – Australia Strategy	−0.50	+4.94	5.4

Equity – Global Sectors is the clearest case. Its modest +1.97% breadth figure is the arithmetic product of extreme internal dispersion: cybersecurity and semiconductor funds advanced strongly over the quarter while gold-mining, uranium and lithium funds in the same category declined sharply. An average spanning both describes neither.

Dispersion is not always a simple commodity story. Dow Jones Newswires commentary through July 2026 put spot uranium at approximately US$84 per pound and characterised it as constructive, while noting operational challenges among ASX-listed producers — yet the uranium funds in this category declined over the same quarter. The two observations coincide; the data establishes no causal link.

What relative strength research indicates about group leadership

Leadership within a group, rather than the group average, is the measure with published empirical support. Thomas Bulkowski, an independent market researcher and author of Encyclopedia of Chart Patterns (Wiley), ranked industries by relative strength across a database running from January 1995 to November 2007. Stocks in the top-ranked industry group advanced +23% over three months against −1% for the bottom-ranked group; extended to one year, +80% against +1%.

Bulkowski's data, published at thepatternsite.com, showed that a rules-based approach — buying the three strongest stocks from the highest-ranked industry by relative strength and selling when that rank decayed — generated average returns of 28.1% per trade from 2000 to 2008, compared to 2.3% for the S&P 500 over the same hold periods.

The parallel to the leadership measure is direct — Bulkowski's rule selected the three strongest constituents of the strongest group. The research was conducted on United States equities across an earlier period and is practitioner research rather than peer-reviewed work, so it establishes no expected return for any ASX fund.

The FMP Momentum Profile — published daily and accessible to FMP YouTube Momentum Profile members — tracks the market conditions that form the context for thematic articles like this one. Members receive early access to the educational data discussed in each weekly session.

Which ASX ETF Category Has Led Most Weeks?

This is the record that accumulates. Each weekly run appends one row per category to a continuing dataset, so the question of which category leads persistently — rather than once — becomes answerable over time.

Leadership log — most recent runs

Week ending	Breadth leader (quarter)	Leadership leader (quarter)	Funds behind the figure
21 Jul 2026	Equity – Global (+5.72%)	Equity – Global Sectors (+35.46%)	BUGG, HACK, SEMI

Weeks at #1 — all-time (tracking began 21 July 2026)

Category	Weeks as breadth leader	Weeks as leadership leader
Equity – Global	1	0
Equity – Global Sectors	0	1

Tracking commenced 21 July 2026. With one run recorded, these tallies describe a single week and no trend should be read into them. The first genuinely informative reading arrives once roughly eight weekly runs exist, from around mid-September 2026. This page is where that record will be published as it builds.

How Do Momentum Traders Use ASX ETF Category Data?

Category data functions as a top-down filter — locating where strength is concentrated before any individual fund is examined. The academic case for treating prior relative strength as informative is long established.

Research by Jegadeesh and Titman, published in the Journal of Finance in 1993, found that momentum strategies generated 12.01% annual excess returns over a 24-year period — establishing momentum as one of the most robust anomalies in financial markets.

Applied to categories, three observations follow. The leadership measure identifies which group holds genuine strength, since a category can rank poorly on breadth and still contain the market's strongest funds. The gap between the two measures shows whether that strength is broad or narrow. And tracking both week to week reveals when leadership transfers — the reason the record is kept rather than the snapshot.

Momentum traders apply comparable reasoning at the stock-sector level through the sector rotation entry framework. ASX ETF categories are the exchange's own product taxonomy, distinct from the Finer Market Points thematic classifications used on company pages; the two are never mapped onto one another.

Category data does not replace fund-level analysis. Fees, structure, currency hedging and index methodology all vary within a category and none appear in a return average — the regional detail for the leading Asian cohort is set out in Asian ETFs on the ASX, and the currency question in the hedged versus unhedged decision. Traders in this situation may wish to speak with a qualified financial adviser about whether a particular product suits their circumstances.

Conclusion

Leadership is currently concentrated rather than broad. Equity – Global Sectors produced the strongest leadership figure of any category over the quarter to 21 July 2026 while its 79-member breadth average of +1.97% concealed that almost entirely, and Equity – Global led on breadth at +5.72%. Christopher Hall updates these ASX ETF categories every week on this page, and the accumulating record — not any single week — is what will show whether the present concentration persists or moves. The FMP Momentum Profile and Gary Glover's weekly sessions, where market conditions like these are reviewed in real time, are accessible to FMP YouTube Momentum Profile members.

Access the Underlying Data

This page draws on publicly available research data compiled for the FMP editorial program. The FMP Momentum Profile and Gary Glover's weekly session recordings — where ASX momentum stocks and the market conditions covered in thematic articles like this one are reviewed in real time — are accessible to FMP YouTube Momentum Profile members. Members receive early access to the educational data that forms the basis of articles like this one. For information on FMP YouTube Momentum Profile membership, visit the FMP YouTube membership page.

About the Author

Christopher Hall, AdvDipFP, is an Authorised Representative operating under AFSL 526688 and writes the Finer Market Points educational program covering Australian momentum markets. He maintains the weekly ASX ETF categories record published on this page.

Remember that past performance is no guarantee of future results, and all trading involves risk.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the ASX ETF categories?

The ASX sorts every quoted exchange traded product into 21 categories in its monthly Exchange Traded Product report: Equity – Australia, Australia Small/Mid Cap, Australia Sectors, Australia Strategy, Global, Asia, Emerging Markets, Global Sectors, Global Strategy and Infrastructure; Property – Australia and Property – Global; Fixed Income – Australian Dollar, Fixed Income – Global and Fixed Income – Fixed Term; plus Cash, Mixed Asset, Currency, Commodity, Crypto Assets and Australian Indices.

Which ASX ETF category performed best this quarter?

Two answers apply to the quarter ending 21 July 2026, across 403 classified products. Measured by the average of all funds in a category, Equity – Global led at +5.72%. Measured by each category's three strongest funds, Equity – Global Sectors led at +35.46%. Both figures are equal-weighted and cover that single 13-week window.

Which ASX ETF category has led most weeks?

Tracking began on 21 July 2026. After the first run, Equity – Global holds one week as breadth leader and Equity – Global Sectors one week as leadership leader, both measured on the quarterly period. One run is not a trend — a meaningful tally requires roughly eight weekly runs, expected from around mid-September 2026, and this page publishes the record as it accumulates.

What is the difference between an all-member average and a top-3 average?

The all-member average is the equal-weighted mean return of every fund in a category reporting data, describing breadth. The top-3 average is the mean of that category's three strongest funds over the same period, describing leadership. A wide gap indicates a small number of funds are producing the category's return while most constituents lag.

Why can an ETF category average be misleading?

Categories can contain funds holding unrelated assets. Equity – Global Sectors held 79 funds covering cybersecurity, semiconductors, gold miners, uranium, hydrogen and biotech as at 21 July 2026. When some advanced sharply while others declined sharply across that quarter, the resulting +1.97% average described neither group.

How many ETFs are listed on the ASX?

This analysis classified 403 actively tracked exchange traded products as at 21 July 2026, covering index ETFs, active ETFs, structured products and commodity trusts. Eleven individual company shares appearing in the source watchlist were excluded because they are not exchange traded products. The figure reflects one weekly export and moves as products list and delist.

Which ASX ETF category performed worst this quarter?

Commodity recorded the weakest breadth figure at −14.81% for the quarter to 21 July 2026, followed by Crypto Assets at −13.32% and Equity – Australia Small/Mid Cap at −3.04%. Measured on leadership instead, Crypto Assets was weakest at −12.51%. All figures are equal-weighted across that single 13-week window.

Why did Australian ETF categories underperform global ones this quarter?

Across the quarter to 21 July 2026, every Australian equity category recorded a negative breadth average, ranging from −0.50% for Equity – Australia Strategy to −3.04% for Australia Small/Mid Cap, while every broad global equity category was positive. The Commodity category declined 14.81% over the same window. The data records these movements together without establishing a causal link between them.

Does a top-ranked ETF category mean it is a good investment?

No. Category rankings describe price movement that has already occurred across a defined historical period. They are momentum observations rather than assessments of merit, value or suitability, and they exclude fees, structure, currency hedging and index methodology — all of which differ between funds inside a single category.

How often is this ASX ETF category data updated?

Weekly. The series is recalculated each week from a full ASX exchange traded product performance export and appended to a continuing record, so changes in leadership can be tracked run to run. Each update reports the same two measures — all-member average and top-3 average — across one-week, one-month, one-quarter and one-year rolling periods.

How is this different from the ASX ETF momentum leaders list?

This page ranks the 21 ASX ETF categories as groups and names individual funds only as evidence for a category's figure. The momentum leaders list ranks individual funds by quarterly return without reference to category. A fund can appear on that list while its category ranks poorly on breadth — which is what occurred with the cybersecurity and semiconductor funds inside Equity – Global Sectors over the quarter to 21 July 2026.

Sources

#	Source	Type
1	Christopher Hall, Finer Market Points. ASX exchange traded product category dataset — 403 products across 21 ASX categories, weekly ASX ETP performance export (Iress), week ending 21 July 2026.	FMP proprietary data
2	ASX Limited. Exchange Traded Product Report — category taxonomy for ASX-quoted exchange traded products (2026).	Published research
3	Bulkowski, T. Industry relative strength performance study, January 1995 – November 2007, and rules-based industry rank test, 2000–2008 (550 stocks, 114 trades). thepatternsite.com.	Published research
4	Bulkowski, T. Encyclopedia of Chart Patterns (Wiley).	Published research
5	Jegadeesh, N., & Titman, S. (1993). Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency. Journal of Finance, 48(1), 65–91.	Published research
6	Dow Jones Newswires. Market Talks — uranium commentary, June–July 2026 (spot uranium price reference, ASX producer commentary).	Published research

Related Finer Market Points Educational Resources

• ASX ETF Momentum Leaders: Top 10 by Quarterly Return — Christopher Hall

• BUGG vs HACK vs CLDD: Three Top ASX ETFs Riding the Cybersecurity Leaders — Christopher Hall

• Asian ETFs on the ASX: The Complete List by Region (2026) — Christopher Hall

• Hedged vs Unhedged ETFs: Which Is Better for Australians? — Christopher Hall

• How ASX Momentum Traders Identify Sector Rotation Opportunities Before the Catalyst Arrives — Christopher Hall

Disclaimer

This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

The information, opinions and other materials appearing on this website are of a general nature only and shall not be construed as advice. Finer Market Points Pty Ltd, CAR 1304002, AFSL 526688, ABN 87 645 284 680. This general information is educational only and not financial advice, recommendation, forecast or solicitation. This is not taxation advice. Rose Bay Equities accepts no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information, opinions or other materials provided on or accessible through this website. This website has not been prepared with reference to your individual financial or personal circumstances. You should not rely on any advice on this website without first seeking appropriate professional, financial and legal advice. Further, where Rose Bay Equities makes third party material available or accessible through this website you acknowledge that Rose Bay Equities is a distributor and not a publisher of that content and that its editorial control is limited to the selection of those materials to make available. We accept no liability for any loss or damages arising from use.