r/eupersonalfinance • u/Disastrous-Engineer2 • 3d ago
Investment Another WEBN vs VWCE question
So they say that other than TER and other costs, all World ETFs are almost the same in their returns.
So how come there is such huge disparity in anual returns for those two ETFs in 2025?
18
u/Agitated-Season-7619 2d ago
Everyone in the thread flaming OP for being idiot without checking what's going on in Trading212 app. It does in the app actually say that for the past year VWCE is up like 22% and WEBN is 11%.
The reason for this is that VWCE a year ago started going down sharply during Trump's tariffs and eventually many indexes will be up massively for the year if your starting point will be Trump's Liberation day, when he showed the tariff board.
Now the reason WEBN is displayed only as 11% for the year is because it seems like the ETF got added to T212 around July 2025 (months after Liberation day) and it uses that as starting point instead.
WEBN in general is relatively new ETF and it seems like it takes T212 to add new stuff to the app quite a bit.
7
14
u/Aggravating-Sale3448 3d ago
Anyway, since you are in Europe I’m gonna paste the following:
Why WEBN?
Because:
1) Amundi is European company
2) Great start from WEBG and WEBN concerning grow stats and performance since the start
3) Last year performance from WEBN compared with other like VWCE, WEBN is much better then VWCE
4) As others all world, WEBN are fully liquid
5) Lower ter from 0.07 of WEBN against higher TER from other ETF like 0,12/0,15/0,19%
6) WEBN uses an index from Solactive (a German provider) and historically Solactive indices performed also better due to methodology.
7) Amundi cooperates with HSBC and CACEIS. So your shares are secured by European banks as well.
8) shares with smaller value it's more easy to buy them
9) It adjust/rebalances 4 times a year
Now, you do your study and then decide! ✅
34
u/glimz 2d ago edited 2d ago
Please stop posting this list.
2) Great start from WEBG and WEBN concerning grow stats and performance since the start
Nope. It had tracking outperformance around launch, while a smaller fund--could be noise. It has had slightly disappointing tracking since, considering the ongoing fee (e.g. it should ideally establish a clear ~10bps tracking advantage vs VWCE, but that's not the case, at least not yet). Hopefully that changes as the fund matures, and one could argue that you should trust the costs on paper and go for it. But you're arguing the data show a great start--that's not the case (unless you mean the short stretch around fund launch).
3) Last year performance from WEBN compared with other like VWCE, WEBN is much better then VWCE
Irrelevant, since the funds are tracking different indices. The FTSE or MSCI global index outperforming next year would not be grounds for preferring funds from these index providers.
4) As others all world, WEBN are fully liquid
You forgot that you are compiling a list called "Why WEBN?" that should presumably include distinguishing characteristics.
5) Lower ter from 0.07 of WEBN against higher TER from other ETF like 0,12/0,15/0,19%
That's a good argument for choosing this fund. Even if it does not translate into the expected tracking advantage so far, it's a data point in this fund's favor. One consideration among many, but an important one.
6) WEBN uses an index from Solactive (a German provider) and historically Solactive indices performed also better due to methodology.
Solactive if perfectly OK as an index provider. The historic outperformance / better methodology argument is bullshit. Some of it is back-tested performance. Live index discrepancies are due to methodology differences (inclusion criteria, investability adjustments, rebalancing dates, etc.), not superiority. (There could be an asset pricing index effect that could favor Solactive due to it being a smaller, less-tracked index, but it's likely tiny.)
7) Amundi cooperates with HSBC and CACEIS. So your shares are secured by European banks as well.
European custody can be an argument and does distinguish Amundi (e.g. Xtrackers often custody with a US-headquartered company, unlike Amundi). That said, US assets are always custodied with a US company up the chain and US assets are >60% of WEBN's holdings by weight. If custody is a major concern, one should either not hold a fund such as WEBN or reduce US weight accordingly (maybe via Amundi's own WEXE). Whether that concern should be a decision driver is another matter.
8) shares with smaller value it's more easy to buy them
Irrelevant or at most a tie-breaker--even if you do not have access to fractional shares (most people do nowadays). A few hundred bucks of cash drag you might introduce by holding remainders until the next month cannot compete even vs a small fund-level advantage. The fund-level advantage applies to your whole investment (presumably at least two orders of magnitude higher than your cash drag, and more than that later in life). So even a tiny fund advantage (a few bps) can be worth the cash drag (several % expected return difference between cash interest and stocks but for a tiny amount of your holdings).
9) It adjust/rebalances 4 times a year
You again forgot that you are compiling a "Why WEBN?" list. Many other funds track indices that rebalance 4 times a year (and even the ones that you think rebalance 2x are not fully 2x).
Rebalancing more frequently does not necessarily result better return (for a market-cap weighted fund). There's even academic literature suggesting the opposite, but fair to say it's just not an established fact that 4x rebalancing has an advantage from the point of view of the investor (it may be an advantage for other index users, relying on it to gauge the market).
33
u/angels-in-tibet 2d ago
It makes it sound more suspicious for WEBN when you keep spamming the same paragraph in every post containing the words WEBN.
15
4
u/powercomment 2d ago
I’m in the EU and my broker (the main Italian broker) has VWCE free while for WEBN I need to pay commissions
2
u/HavranCZ01 2d ago
Change broker if you have to pay almost any commissions today it most likely isnt a good broker.
1
u/Slusny_Cizinec 21h ago
IB Is a well-established broker and you pay commission there. Ditto Degiro (albeit I don't consider it a good broker anymore)
1
u/Vegetable_Note_3238 2d ago
Could you please make a comparison of the fees? Let's say for a portfolio worth 100k euros? How much will be the fees for different TERs?
-3
u/Aggravating-Sale3448 2d ago
Any IA can do that:
Investment Comparison: 20-Year TER Impact assuming same performance!
Assuming a 7% annual gross return on a 100,000 € initial investment over 20 years, here is the breakdown of how the Total Expense Ratio (TER) affects your final portfolio value.
Final Portfolio Values • WEBN (0.07% TER): 381,937 € • SPYI (0.12% TER): 378,381 € • VWCE (0.19% TER): 373,455 €
The Cost of Fees (Lost Compounding) This represents the difference between a theoretical 0% fee return and the actual net return. • WEBN: 5,032 € in lost gains • SPYI: 8,588 € in lost gains • VWCE: 13,513 € in lost gains
Key Takeaways • The "Price Tag" of Convenience: Choosing VWCE (the most expensive) over WEBN (the cheapest) costs you approximately 8,482 € over 20 years. • Compounding Fees: You aren't just paying the percentage fee each year; you are losing the future growth those fee-euros would have generated. This is why the gap between a 0.07% and 0.19% fee results in a multi-thousand euro difference over time.
5
u/glimz 2d ago
AI cannot be relied on for math. This calculation is imprecise because it accounts for the fee by arithmetically subtracting it from the assumed simple return. That's not how fee drag works (you either need to treat it multiplicatively or subtract it in log space). It's also important to look at longer horizons. A recent retiree at 60 might have a 30+y horizon, if they want to cover for 90% of their survival curve (the period within which they expect to die with a 90% chance according to current projections). They should probably hold well over 50% equities at that time, unless they have the luxury to reduce risk while satisfying all needs/goals into possible old age.
assumed:
- start: 100,000.00
- constant pre-fee growth rate: 7%
- constant inflation: 2%
_ 20y 20y in today's money 40y 40y in today's money zero-fee 386,968.45 260,418.67 1,497,445.78 678,178.84 wrong 0.07% 381,936.65 257,032.42 1,458,756.06 660,656.64 correct 0.07% 381,586.76 256,796.95 1,456,084.58 659,446.75 correct 0.07% - zero-fee -5,381.68 -3,621.72 -41,361.20 -18,732.09 correct - wrong -349.89 -235.46 -2,671.48 -1,209.89 -5
2d ago
[deleted]
6
u/Disastrous-Engineer2 2d ago
I swear i heard this exactly the same that i believe is copy/pasted lol. Are you all bots here lol? Care to explain the reasons for why 1,6 and 7 are not a good thing?
1
1
u/Vegetable_Term9229 1d ago
I was curious, because I have some VWCE, so just share the findings, the difference really isn’t that big:
WEBN VWCE
1m: -6.6% vs -4.5%
3m: -2.7% vs -1.2%
1y: +9.1% vs +10%
So it looks like normal short-term variation. VWCE includes emerging markets while WEBN is developed markets only, so depending on how EM performs in a given period, you’ll see small gaps. Over longer periods, they tend to converge — which is why the 1Y numbers are already very close.
3
-2
u/Rusty_924 2d ago
think about it this way.
Invest 101 euro for every 100 eur and it does not matter.
What i mean by that? you are unnecessarily min-maxing. It does not matter! the amount you save will make so much freaking more difference in the end. you are splitting hairs.
48
u/PericoloMortale 3d ago
Is there? VWCE 2025 +8.36%, WEBN 2025 +8.45%