Which Vanguard Fund: FTSE All World v FTSE Global All Cap
![[Deleted User]](https://us-noi.v-cdn.net/6031891/uploads/defaultavatar/nFA7H6UNOO0N5.jpg)

Up until now I've invested in Vanguard's FTSE All World (VWRL )which is:
4k funds, 6 out of 7 on the risk scale and charges 0.22%.
But I see a lot of you are choosing Global All Cap (VAFTGAG) instead
7k stocks, 5 out of 7 risk, 0.23% charge
Vanguard also has an ESG (ethical?) version of the Global All Cap (V3AB) which seems popular
6k stocks, 6 out of 7 risk, 0.24% charge
What do any of you think about these 3 respective funds?
Thanks!
Comments
-
[Deleted User] said:Hey all,
Up until now I've invested in Vanguard's FTSE All World (VWRL )which is:
4k funds, 6 out of 7 on the risk scale and charges 0.22%.
But I see a lot of you are choosing Global All Cap (VAFTGAG) instead
7k stocks, 5 out of 7 risk, 0.23% charge
Vanguard also has an ESG (ethical?) version of the Global All Cap (V3AB) which seems popular
6k stocks, 6 out of 7 risk, 0.24% charge
What do any of you think about these 3 respective funds?
Thanks!
The difference in fees is irrelevent - published charges are calculated from the previous year's actuals and vary over time. In any case a difference of 0.01%/year is rather less important than the exact day in which you decide to sell.
So purely because it is the most diversified of the 3 funds I would go for the non ESG Global All Cap fund.1 -
Weird, I posted a comment but it disappeared
i had said that I am tracking both, and now own the ESG one having previously owned the GloballAll Cap one. Up until recently the ESG was lagging on performance, but has overtaken the other one. I believe the ESG is more tech heavy, which may explain that. I’m simply tracking the price of each on a monthly and annual basis, so what I am tracking may not be the official performance, but it works for me1 -
dharm999 said:I believe the ESG is more tech heavy, which may explain that.
1 -
masonic said:dharm999 said:I believe the ESG is more tech heavy, which may explain that.
I don't have this specific fund but do invest in ESG funds. I'm well aware that some of them contain shares in large tech companies so it's not really fair to label it as an "unintended consequence" - I don't personally have any major objections to holding funds with them (significantly more than I do for most other capitalistic companies in any case!).0 -
callum9999 said:masonic said:dharm999 said:I believe the ESG is more tech heavy, which may explain that.
I don't have this specific fund but do invest in ESG funds. I'm well aware that some of them contain shares in large tech companies so it's not really fair to label it as an "unintended consequence" - I don't personally have any major objections to holding funds with them (significantly more than I do for most other capitalistic companies in any case!).
3 -
masonic said:callum9999 said:masonic said:dharm999 said:I believe the ESG is more tech heavy, which may explain that.
I don't have this specific fund but do invest in ESG funds. I'm well aware that some of them contain shares in large tech companies so it's not really fair to label it as an "unintended consequence" - I don't personally have any major objections to holding funds with them (significantly more than I do for most other capitalistic companies in any case!).
Perhaps you were just being hyperbolic, but again, I don't personally have a strong objection to investing in tech companies so there is no "unintended consequences" for them being present in an ESG fund I may be interested in. Your objections are so vague I can't think of many companies that you couldn't apply the same criticism to, can you name some examples of companies you think are worthy of being included?
Though you seem to have completely dismissed my criticism of your presented view of what ESG actually is, you're still giving off the vibe that you genuinely think it's "only invest in companies that are bastions of social good", when it very clearly is not. I'm not aware of a single fund that claims to be anywhere close to that - perhaps you know of one?0 -
callum9999 said:masonic said:callum9999 said:masonic said:dharm999 said:I believe the ESG is more tech heavy, which may explain that.
I don't have this specific fund but do invest in ESG funds. I'm well aware that some of them contain shares in large tech companies so it's not really fair to label it as an "unintended consequence" - I don't personally have any major objections to holding funds with them (significantly more than I do for most other capitalistic companies in any case!).
Though you seem to have completely dismissed my criticism of your presented view of what ESG actually is, you're still giving off the vibe that you genuinely think it's "only invest in companies that are bastions of social good", when it very clearly is not. I'm not aware of a single fund that claims to be anywhere close to that - perhaps you know of one?I'll bring these two points together, as it seems you were unaware when I used the phrase "I would not consider the large tech companies to be bastions of social good", I was using a literary device known as understatement, and in fact intended to convey that I viewed some of them as really quite bad on social metrics. There are hundreds of companies that take their social responsibilities much more seriously, act ethically and sustainably, and would therefore be candidates for inclusion or overweight in a such a fund.callum9999 said:
Perhaps you were just being hyperbolic, but again, I don't personally have a strong objection to investing in tech companies so there is no "unintended consequences" for them being present in an ESG fund I may be interested in. Your objections are so vague I can't think of many companies that you couldn't apply the same criticism to, can you name some examples of companies you think are worthy of being included?3 -
Only one post in this thread contains insults and it isn't one of mine. At this time of festive cheer, I won't be dragged down to that level, so I'll bid this interaction farewell. Hopefully my explanations and reasoning, put forward in good faith, are of some interest to others.
5 -
That's why an ethical investor really needs to look under the bonnet to avoid the unintended consequence of having money redeployed into something else they find objectionable on the same or similar grounds
Whilst the FCA seems to be looking more deeply at what ESG should actually imply, by providing a range of new labels, I suspect the above will remain the case.On the original question, it perahps depends also on age and temperament. All three funds are well diversified, but 100% equity I think. VWRL doesn't seem to include funds AFAIK (https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/v/vanguard-ftse-all-world-ucits-etf-usd-dist), so you need to be happy you can cope with the volatility and have time to recover if there is a 50%, long lasting drop in the world economy (WW3 perhaps?).
On that basis I would probably prefer VAFTGAG, as it is supposedly lower risk, with more different stocks included.
So I do tend to check portfolios for what I don't want to invest in, as you can't yet be sure quite what companies an ESG label will exclude.
2 -
I do also wonder, in a time when investing in smallish quantities of individual stocks has become very feasible (it also seems issues around fractional share ownership are going away), one might layer an ethically driven self-selected portfolio over a broader global index fund. That is, if the original question included the ESG fund for such a reason, not just that it was an example of a popular globally diversified fund.
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 348.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 452.6K Spending & Discounts
- 241.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 618.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176K Life & Family
- 254.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards