Devon Australian Fund (Wholesale) vs Norfolk Mortgage Trust Fund
Side-by-side facts extracted from manager-published IM/PDS/SIPO documents. 0 fields match, 0 differ, 0 disclosed by only one fund.
Why these differ
Generated 2026-05-19 from the structured facts below. Verify against the source IM/PDS before relying on this summary for investment decisions.
The most material structural difference is asset class and liquidity profile. Devon Australian Fund holds Australasian equities — a listed, market-priced asset class — and processes redemptions daily, subject to a broadly worded suspension power. Norfolk Mortgage Trust Fund invests in private credit secured by first mortgages, with a maximum LVR of 75%, and requires 183 days' redemption notice; the manager may suspend redemptions if requests exceed 5% of units in any three-month period, or must call an investor meeting if requests exceed 20% of units on issue. This illiquidity premium is the structural trade-off underlying the two funds.
On fees, Devon charges a management fee of 0.87% per annum; Norfolk charges 2.5% per annum. Norfolk discloses a specific target return — "to exceed the Six-month term deposit rate (published by the RBNZ) by 1.4% per annum (after the deduction of fees and expenses)" — whereas Devon's IM does not specify a target return figure. Norfolk has been operating since 2006; Devon's IM does not disclose an inception date. Both are PIE-structured unit trusts eligible for PIR taxation. Devon's minimum investment is NZD 10,000; Norfolk's is NZD 5,000. Devon pays distributions semi-annually; Norfolk pays monthly. Devon is supervised by NZ Guardian Trust; Norfolk by Public Trust. Norfolk's PDS confirms it is not wholesale-only; Devon is marketed as a wholesale fund.
Verify all figures against each fund's current IM or PDS before relying on this summary.
Fact-by-fact comparison
Source documents
Devon Australian Fund (Wholesale)
No documents ingested yet.
Methodology
Facts extracted via Claude Sonnet 4.6 from manager-published IM/PDS/SIPO PDFs. Confidence tiers: ●verified (all required keys populated), ◐inferred (some required keys null), ○not on file. Where IM and SIPO/PDS disclose the same fact, verified takes precedence over inferred.
The “Why these differ” summary above is generated once per pair by Sonnet from the structured facts in this table and cached as JSON. It is regenerated when either fund’s facts change.
Wholesale-only — for eligible investors per FMCA Schedule 1. Not financial advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Verify each fact against the source IM/PDS before relying on it for investment decisions.
