VWRL, SWDA or HMWO?

MonroeM

I am looking at investing in a World ETF and am trying to decide between VWRL, SWDA & HMWO.

VWRL & HMWO yield around 2% whereas SWDA I understand has no dividend yield. HMWO is much smaller than its mainstream large share fund rivals VWRL & SWDA so could this be a disadvantage?

The charges are roughly the same between 0.20 and 0.25% so is it just personal preference or is there any other differences in these World ETF's?

A_T

VWRL includes emerging markets - SWDA and HMWO are developed markets only.


HMWO charge is 0.15%

ArchBair

I don't think there is hardly any difference in performance as well.

Glen_Clark

MonroeM wrote: »

I am looking at investing in a World ETF and am trying to decide between VWRL, SWDA & HMWO.

VWRL & HMWO yield around 2% whereas SWDA I understand has no dividend yield. HMWO is much smaller than its mainstream large share fund rivals VWRL & SWDA so could this be a disadvantage?

The charges are roughly the same between 0.20 and 0.25% so is it just personal preference or is there any other differences in these World ETF's?

VWRL charges most because its the most diversified.
According to FT HMWO is lowest charges at 0.15% http://funds.ft.com/uk/Tearsheet/Summary?s=HMWO:LSE:GBX
SWDA is an acumulator so the dividends are reinvested - and more efficiently than doinmg it yourself. This makes tax calculations complicated, but you don't need to do them if held in an ISA.
Disadvantage of the smaller ETF (HMWO) is difference between buying and selling price likely to be slightly higher. But you only pay it once so if its spread over several years holding them it will be practically irrelevant.

Glen_Clark

I hold VWRL and SWDA which I can't sell without incurring CGT.

If I was buying now I would buy HMWO

grey_gym_sock

or what about VEVE?

it's very similar to HMWO - i.e. it's developed markets only, and it pays dividends.

its OCF is slightly higher (0.18%, compared to 0.15% for HMWO).

but ...

1) the difference in OCF (0.03%) is small enough that it's possible that it would be more than made up for by more efficient management, or by returning the full profits from stock lending to the ETF (note: i don't know if these ETFs currently do any stock lending).

2) vanguard are more likely to cut the OCF in future, because they'll do so when they can, not just when forced to by competition.

Sue58

ArchBair wrote: »

I don't think there is hardly any difference in performance as well.

How do you check the performance figures for these ETF's?

I'd like to check the performance figures against a global fund such as Henderson Global Growth or a global IT such as Witan?

A_T

Sue58 wrote: »

How do you check the performance figures for these ETF's?

I'd like to check the performance figures against a global fund such as Henderson Global Growth or a global IT such as Witan?

Morningstar, FT and Trustnet have free tools that enable one to do comparisons like that.

ColdIron

Sue58 wrote: »

How do you check the performance figures for these ETF's?

I'd like to check the performance figures against a global fund such as Henderson Global Growth or a global IT such as Witan?

They are shares just like your ITs. Use the comparison tools provided by TrustNet, MorningStar or even HL

ArchBair

Sue58 wrote: »

How do you check the performance figures for these ETF's?

I'd like to check the performance figures against a global fund such as Henderson Global Growth or a global IT such as Witan?

Over 5 years the Henderson Global Growth as delivered 125.7 and Witan 103.3, whereas VWRL 78.2 and SWDA 84.3.

HMWO only has figures for the past 3 years but they are very similar, in fact there is only about 1% difference between all three ETF's over the past 3 years..

Sue58

ArchBair wrote: »

Over 5 years the Henderson Global Growth as delivered 125.7 and Witan 103.3, whereas VWRL 78.2 and SWDA 84.3.

HMWO only has figures for the past 3 years but they are very similar, in fact there is only about 1% difference between all three ETF's over the past 3 years..

Thanks for those figures, I was just about to check them on Trustnet as suggested by other people.

So the active fund and IT have done better over the past 5 years and also in this recent downturn/correction over the past few weeks.