Vanguard ESG Global All Cap UCITS ETF (V3AA)

FTSE Global All Cap Choice Index (aka all Shares like VT ex. a few problematic sectors); holds 4’200 shares so far (might grow with higher AUM). IE ETF yet with CHF Listing at SIX; TER of 0.24%…

Index Factsheet:

Launched 23 March 2021 and so far with about 30M of volume only. Yet, I expect that volumes could go high very fast. Propose to wait for a year to see how Volumes go and then take this as THEgo forward ETF for anyone that doesnt want to invest in US based ETF.

In combination with the IE based Life Strategy ETF, which I also highly recommend, one can come down with a very simple Stocks and Bonds blend…

2 Likes

What is the TER? I couldn’t find it in the factsheet…

Here are the factsheet about the product itself :wink:

I already take a look about this ETF and I’m interested in altought I’m already invested in VT. However, my girlfriend is a bit more concerned about ESG criteria, so it could become something we will trade in the future. I hesitate for now to put some money in, but from what I’ve seen, it seems that there isn’t a lot of trading volume for the distributive one especially in Switzerland. It seems to be more tradable on Xetra for both (accumulative and distributive).

We will see how this new fund will evolve in the next month :slight_smile:

1 Like

You need to think long term. Right now oil is high due to the military crisis. But in 10-20 years I think renewables will provide a serious alternative to oil

Here’s what FTSE excludes from their Choice index:

  • Vice Products (Adult Entertainment, Alcohol, Gambling, Tobacco)
  • Non-Renewable Energy (Nuclear Power, Fossil Fuels)
  • Weapons (Chemical & Biological Weapons, Cluster Munitions, Anti-Personnel Landmines, Nuclear Weapons, Civilian Firearms, and Conventional Military Weapons)

My opinion:

  • vice: I’m very much for this; we should not make money off of other’s people addiction. I would even add to that the random dopamine shot generator platforms like Facebook, Instagram and TikTok. I think they are detrimental to our society.
  • non-renewables: I want a World which does not burn oil, I believe in SWB (solar, wind, batteries) and I think you will be very surprised how this tech develops in the next 10-20 years
  • weapons: I would be very much against developing weapons until just a few weeks ago. Now, after Russia’s attack, I would say we should allow the development of defensive weaponry (anti-missile shields, anti-tank weapons)

The problem is that those “bad” companies don’t go away, just because people don’t invest in them.

You don’t really harm the tobacco company by not buying their shares, they still have customers that buy their products. You just make the dividend cheaper for other people.

As I see it the only reasons for ESG are:

  • Moral, i.e. if you really could not live with yourself knowing that you made profits from that. (But still knowing that it won’t change anything…)

  • As a bet, because you expect more profits on those areas.

3 Likes

I think so too. If now everyone is doing an extra effort in getting rid of oil and gas stuff, there will be a significant price drop in those commodities. Maybe because of the shortage you can now make money with it but in the mid and long term those will be losing money.

Agree on that. But I also think that the current situation shows that weapons are very important. If only rogue states will have weapons it won’t help the peaceful world because then the rogue states will just be able to overrun the peaceful world more easily. So here we should do quite the opposite and support the weapon industry and governments should buy more weapons and even consider nuclear weapons as a deterrent. Russia would not have attacked Ukraine if Ukraine would have kept their nuclear weapons. We need to adapt and align our security posture to the threat all those rogue states pose to us and not to how we imagine the perfect world to be.

This guy is usually analysing stuff from a game theory perspective but he made also a video about ESG investing which I accidentally saw Wie gut ist nachhaltiges Investieren? (ESG-Investing) - YouTube (unfortunately in German).

Thanks for your opinion. I still haven’t decided if I should buy V3AA, so let’s discuss :sunglasses:

Are you sure about that? I could see two areas where excluding these businesses could harm them:

  • when a company wants to grow and raises capital through issuing additional stock, the demand for this stock will be lower, so the dilution of existing investors is higher; but yes, the new investors, who decide to buy, can pick up this stock on the cheap
  • when existing investors want to exit, they want to sell their shares; they will receive less money for their stock due to lower demand

Hmm… I don’t know. Feels like I’m not informed enough to figure out what the real effect would be. On the surface it seems you’re right, though. If nobody wants to be a drug dealer, the one who decides to be one can operate without competition and will still find customers.

There is a theory that divesting from whole industries is not creating incentives for companies to improve, i.e. become incrementally greener or more socially responsible.

If investors would rather tilt portfolios towards greener companies within industries, that would provide incentives for companies to compete for the greenest in the industry title to boost their stock value.

No references, I’ve heard it in passing somewhere.

1 Like

Yep, as usual, Benny has an episode on that too. :smiley:

2 Likes