1J·

UniGlobal-net vs. FTSE All World - active vs. passive in a reality check

Recently I have been looking a little more closely at the $UI4L (+0 %) and compared it with a classic world index like the $VWRL (+0,19 %) especially in terms of costs.


Performance in comparison (approx. values, cost-adjusted)

1 year:

  • UniGlobal: ~+10-11 %
  • FTSE All World: ~+12 %

3 years:

  • UniGlobal: ~+49 %
  • FTSE All World: ~+53 %

5 years:

  • UniGlobal: ~+60-61 %
  • FTSE All World: ~+68 %


Meaning: Despite active management, the $UI4L (+0 %) slightly behind the broad market (and even relatively consistently).


If you look at the overall picture, it quickly becomes clear that the cost structure in particular plays a decisive role. While the $UI4L (+0 %) comes with running costs of around 1.8% (plus a possible performance fee), an ETF on the FTSE All World is usually only around 0.15-0.25%. This difference has a massive impact on returns in the long term and explains a large part of the underperformance.


Nevertheless, I do not see the $UI4L (+0 %) as a "bad" product across the board. Especially for investors who do not want to actively manage their portfolio or deliberately opt for active management, a fund like this can make perfect sense. The psychological factor also plays a role, you give up some of the responsibility and have the feeling that someone is actively steering you through market phases.


It was exactly the same for me: the $UI4L (+0 %) is currently my core position and has given me a certain sense of security, especially in my first few years on the stock market, thanks to active management. At the same time, however, I am noticing more and more that I am becoming increasingly critical of the high costs and am thinking about at least partially reallocating the position.


In the end, the comparison shows me one thing above all: there is no clear "right or wrong" here. One $VWRL (+0,19 %) is the more favorable and efficient solution from a rational point of view, while an active fund such as the $UI4L (+0 %) may well be justified for certain types of investors - especially at the beginning.


How do you see it? Do you consistently invest in ETFs or do you also consciously hold active funds in your portfolio? If so, why?


~ No investment advice ~

5
3 Commentaires

If an active fund is not able to significantly outperform market-wide ETFs, it has no right to exist in my opinion and has no place in my portfolio.
But if you feel comfortable with it, that's fine too.
9
image de profil
@Solitair you couldn't have summed it up any better :)
image de profil
@Solitair Basically, I'm right there with you - if an active fund doesn't beat the market in the long term, it's difficult to justify from a purely economic point of view. This is precisely the reason why I am currently considering switching to an ETF in the future.

In my view, however, the psychological aspect should not be underestimated. Products like UniGlobal can give newcomers in particular (at least that's how it was for me) a certain sense of security because there is active management behind them. And I do believe that there are investors who are consciously prepared to give up some returns in return.

From a sober and rational point of view, this is of course not ideal - but the stock market is not just mathematics, it is also psychology.
Participez à la conversation