The AI spits this out: 1. LDGL does not pay dividends from the fund’s assets LDGL (L&G Global Quality Dividend Low Volatility) is a distributing equity ETF that collects and passes on dividends from the companies in its portfolio.
This means:
Dividends come from the companies, not from the ETF’s capital.
The ETF does not sell shares to finance distributions.
There is no dilution of net assets due to the distribution.
This would only be the case with synthetic, non-income-generating products (e.g., covered call ETFs such as QYLD, XYLU), but not with LDGL.
2. Why the cost basis decreases with some brokers The misunderstanding stems from the way it’s presented:
Trade Republic, Scalable, and others They often include dividends as “return” in the performance calculation.
This makes it appear as though the cost basis is decreasing.
In reality, the cost basis remains unchanged, but the total return increases.
Parqet / getquin Show dividends separately → the cost basis remains unchanged.
No broker adjusts the cost basis downward, except in the case of:
Tax partial exemptions (not relevant here)
Capital returns (LDGL has none)
Stock splits (did not occur)
3. LDGL has not reported any capital returns I checked the most recent distributions:
All payments are classified as “Dividend”
Not a single one is classified as “Capital Return” or “Return of Capital”
The NAV history shows no discount that would indicate a withdrawal of net assets
If an ETF were to distribute from capital, you would see:
The NAV falls more sharply than the dividend
The distribution is reported as “ROC”
The TER often rises because synthetic structures are more expensive
With LDGL: none of this is present.
4. Why some users confuse the two Many are only familiar with covered-call ETFs (QYLD, XYLD, XYLU, QDIV, etc.):
These often pay out more than they receive in dividends
The distribution then comes from sold options or net asset value
In this case, the NAV declines over the long term → “dividend from capital”
LDGL is the opposite:
Quality stocks
Dividend strategy
Distributions from corporate profits
NAV remains stable or rises
5. Conclusion for You No — LDGL does not pay out of capital. No — the cost basis is not adjusted. Yes — the dividend is clean and sustainable.
Considering how quickly this happened, I'm confident that we'll have $LDGL (-1,68%) . Currently, my earnings here are around €111 per month. My long-term goal is to invest every month so that I can eventually reach around €500 per month. Here’s hoping the fund continues to perform this well.
As is often the case in life, something always comes up—and this month, it was a spontaneous (and expensive) sofa purchase for our apartment. As a result, we were able to invest €2,500 this month, divided into €1,500 in the $VWRL (-0,68%) and €1,000 in the $LDGL (-1,68%) .
What was your thinking process behind choosing $VWRL instead of $FTWG (also FTSE All-World index), $ISAD, $SPSA, $WEBG or $FTSA? Was it the dividend distribution schedule, coverage strategy, tracked index, TER... a mix of them?
As is often the case in life, something always comes up—and this month, it was a spontaneous (and expensive) purchase of a couch for our apartment. As a result, we were able to invest 2,500 € this month, divided into 1,500 € in the $VWRL (-0,68%) and €1,000 in the $LDGL (-1,68%) .
I have $BATS (+0,5%) and $PG (+0,26%) sold them. I’d had both in my portfolio for several years. Bat doubled in value during that time, but I don’t see it continuing that way, and they’ve also dropped quite a bit since I sold at 55 euros. Procter & Gamble has more or less been treading water, and I got out at 126 with a small loss. I just can’t see them acquiring, say, something like $LDGL (-1,68%) or $TDIV (+0,17%) .
$HAUTO (+0,84%) I have a 2100 shares position in HOEGH and think about selling it completely at 200 NOK because it has grown to 13% of my portfolio. I want to reinvest 10.000 euro in $WINC (-0,23%) and the rest in $LDGL (-1,68%) to have stable dividend growth. Is there a flaw in my thinking or should I keep this cyclical stock but a winner so far?
$VWRL (-0,68%) This is funded through my capital-forming allowance.
$autom (-1,42%)I’ll sell at the beginning of next year—I’ve been using my capital formation allowance to contribute to this.
I want to keep it simple and straightforward. According to AI, it’ll add up to a nice sum by 2040, and I never want to sell this portfolio. What do you think?
You could do that, but right now you’re overweight in the financial sector at 41%, underweight in the U.S. at just 17.5%, and overweight in Europe at 49%. Emerging markets and small-caps are completely missing. For a portfolio you never intend to sell, I’d find this too unbalanced and would prefer to build a proper global ETF (e.g., an ACWI IMI) as the core.
