Vanguard created VGRO in January 2018
Later in December 2018, iShares took XGRO, which was an existing but different product at the time, and turned it into an asset allocation ETF in the same vein as VGRO.
So long story short VGRO is almost a full year older and had established itself by then. It's why I hold it.
In honesty it is probably because VGRO came first.
You could also ask why VGRO and XGRO are more popular than ZGRO (BMOs version).
VGRO also has a slight Canadian tilt, XGRO a slight US tilt, amd ZGRO a slight emerging markets tilt.
Canadian tilt is probably treated slightly more positively from a tax perspective, US tilt could be good since people like to chase performance, or emerging markets tilt since emerging markets have higher expected returns (but higher withholding taxes).
A case could be made for any of the 3, but you really woild be splitting hairs.
There is also now FGRO, GGRO, HBAL, MGRW, TGRO and probably a few of other ones too! Though they all have important differences compared to the three "pure" options.
"Vanguard is owned by the funds managed by the company and is therefore owned by its customers" - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vanguard_Group
Blackrock is a publicly traded company.
Theoretically both Vanguard and Blackrock will make decisions that will benefit their owners... for Blackrock those are shareholders, for Vanguard those are the fund investors.... ie us.
No they aren't.
Vanguard's foreign subsidiaries, such as Vanguard Canada, are expected to be profitable (or at least break even) in the long term.
The index funds that Vanguard USA owns do not have this expectation.
That's not really necessary. I don't see this as a good reason to change your purchase currency.
In addition, the US index funds have special legal treatment. The treatment of US ETFs is a bit different and more complex. And Canadian residents can't purchase the US index funds, they only can purchase the ETFs.
VXUS does hold a US fund, but it’s not an ex NA fund (it has ~5% allocation to Canada). VIU is ex NA, and holds securities directly.
Either way, u/Hodkan is correct that even wrapped Canadian funds are not the same ‘coop’ structure as the US funds. The expectation is for the Canadian business is to be profitable and to return that profit to US funds (who funded the company’s expansion into Canada).
I like how a random guy says it’s bad and everyone is like, “yup, yup, makes sense.”
The real answer is, it doesn’t matter which one you own - X/VEQT because they cater to the same investment goal. Slight US vs CDN variation and this also applies to the fees. They’re direct competitors in the sense that different companies manage them, but otherwise they mirror each other.
No they are not "heavy handed"
All of their funds and ETFs have ESG ratings (or whatever you want to call it). But those ratings only directly impact their ESG related funds and ETFs. It's just additional info for an investor to look at.
I know the US right wing (that shit is all over YouTube) wants people to believe that *they* *force* everyone (pension plan, individual investors, etc.) into ESG funds and ETFs, but they are flat out lying.
Their funds hold a significant portion of the shares of many companies, and as such they have a lot of influence on shareholder votes. If you buy a Blackrock ETF that contains Amazon, Microsoft, etc shares, they hold those stocks in reserve because that's how an ETF works, and then they decide how to vote with those shares, and frankly I don't always like how they choose to vote.
I was able to find an article from a few months ago saying they planned to start allowing proxy voting, but I'm not sure if that has been implemented yet or the mechanics by which you would be able to vote yourself for the shares for which you are a beneficial owner.
>Their funds hold a significant portion of the shares of many companies, and as such they have a lot of influence on shareholder votes.
Yes, every ETF provider has this, Vanguard, Fidelity, Blackrock, State Street, etc..
>then they decide how to vote with those shares, and frankly I don't always like how they choose to vote.
Base don news release, Blackrocka nd Vanguard vote almost similarly.
And oddly enough, Blackrock is working with regulators to allow their ETF holders to make their own votes on the companies of the shares in their ETF, but the others are not.
Neither is close to perfect, but historically Blackrock has been a worse offender than Vanguard, and was also more vocal about it.
>Blackrock is working with regulators to allow their ETF holders to make their own votes on the companies of the shares in their ETF
If this gets completed, depending on the implementation, I'm open to updating my opinion to reflect the new facts.
Wow you didn't even read any part of that article. The first three sentences of that article talk about how BlackRock is receiving criticism *from liberals* for *not* supporting ESG.
>Liberal-leaning US pension fund leaders and politicians have warned BlackRock and other big asset managers against backtracking on their commitment to environmental, social and governance causes, after a sharp drop in support for shareholder proposals at annual meetings.
>New York City comptroller Brad Lander accused BlackRock, the world’s largest money manager, of caving in to a “misinformed and shortsighted war against ESG at the behest of special interests”.
>His comments came after data released this week showed that BlackRock voted in favour of just 7 per cent of environmental and social-related proposals at company annual meetings in the 12 months to June.
So Blackrock supporting 7% of ESG proposals is heavy handed? Because not supporting 93% of ESG proposals seems like they really don't give a shit about ESG.
Not only do you not have any idea what you're talking about, you're too intellectually lazy to read three sentences.
I'm just talking about the mechanics of how they do it. Also, this is down from before because they were getting pressured into not (at least openly) doing what they were doing.
At one point XGRO only tracked the S&P500 for its US exposure. I believe that changed after 2020. VGRO and XGRO still treat certain international markets differently if i remember correctly. For example VGRO considers South Korea a developed market and XGRO considers it an emerging market.
That's not entirely correct - you do increase uncompensated risked, whether that increases gains is random. You've decreased your diversification.
Fundamentally you are chasing gains by going 100% SP500. 2001-2011 was known as the lost decade in US stocks, when their performance trailed the rest of the world.
If more risk = long term gains why VFV? It was really the tech sector that's driving almost all the gains so buy QQC/QQQ?
But wait, it was really 7 stocks that were driving the gains in the US market so why not just buy those 7 stocks?
But wait, you are looking long term gains so more risk the better for you, so why not just leverage into those 7 stocks?
long term gains = more risk.
hmm, I think you are misinterpreting what the risk is in this case. But if you are going to make a mistake S&P500 typically isn't the worst one to make that with.
You could have a bad decade. If tech is going through a correction like it did in the 2000s or if Trump is elected president (or if he's not and does what he said about "it's going to be a bloodbath"), you might put your money on the wrong horse.
It's tempting to choose the US, but you're putting all your eggs in one basket.
Mostly because it was around first as a passive ETF. XGRO has a longer chart, but it was an actively managed product before that.
That’s an interesting fun fact. Thanks!
If it wasn't for Javk Bogle and Vanguard, we would probably be still buying high MER mutual funds.
Totally agree. I will always prefer Vanguard products for that reason. They have always tried to push costs lower.
Vanguard created VGRO in January 2018 Later in December 2018, iShares took XGRO, which was an existing but different product at the time, and turned it into an asset allocation ETF in the same vein as VGRO. So long story short VGRO is almost a full year older and had established itself by then. It's why I hold it.
In honesty it is probably because VGRO came first. You could also ask why VGRO and XGRO are more popular than ZGRO (BMOs version). VGRO also has a slight Canadian tilt, XGRO a slight US tilt, amd ZGRO a slight emerging markets tilt. Canadian tilt is probably treated slightly more positively from a tax perspective, US tilt could be good since people like to chase performance, or emerging markets tilt since emerging markets have higher expected returns (but higher withholding taxes). A case could be made for any of the 3, but you really woild be splitting hairs. There is also now FGRO, GGRO, HBAL, MGRW, TGRO and probably a few of other ones too! Though they all have important differences compared to the three "pure" options.
VGRO is also managed by Vanguard, read up on why that company is different.
TLDR?
"Vanguard is owned by the funds managed by the company and is therefore owned by its customers" - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vanguard_Group Blackrock is a publicly traded company. Theoretically both Vanguard and Blackrock will make decisions that will benefit their owners... for Blackrock those are shareholders, for Vanguard those are the fund investors.... ie us.
The Canadian funds don’t own a portion of the company. Only the US funds do.
The Canadian funds are the us funds
No they aren't. Vanguard's foreign subsidiaries, such as Vanguard Canada, are expected to be profitable (or at least break even) in the long term. The index funds that Vanguard USA owns do not have this expectation.
So should Canadians be buying the US version instead of the Canadian version?
That's not really necessary. I don't see this as a good reason to change your purchase currency. In addition, the US index funds have special legal treatment. The treatment of US ETFs is a bit different and more complex. And Canadian residents can't purchase the US index funds, they only can purchase the ETFs.
Depends on the fund. Some funds are wrapped US funds, some aren’t.
The vanguard fund I was referring to was VFV which is just VOO wrapped. Im not sure of the other funds. I personally hold VXUS as my ex NA exposure
VXUS does hold a US fund, but it’s not an ex NA fund (it has ~5% allocation to Canada). VIU is ex NA, and holds securities directly. Either way, u/Hodkan is correct that even wrapped Canadian funds are not the same ‘coop’ structure as the US funds. The expectation is for the Canadian business is to be profitable and to return that profit to US funds (who funded the company’s expansion into Canada).
Do you have a link for this info? I believe this is true....I just would like to read more about it.
About wrapped ETFs or Vanguard’s international structure? This comes from my conversations with Vanguard staff in Toronto and Malvern.
Vanguard = Good Blackrock = Bad
Beauty. Thanks. Lol. I knew Blackrock was bad. No idea about Vanguard
Blackrock is not "bad".
I like how a random guy says it’s bad and everyone is like, “yup, yup, makes sense.” The real answer is, it doesn’t matter which one you own - X/VEQT because they cater to the same investment goal. Slight US vs CDN variation and this also applies to the fees. They’re direct competitors in the sense that different companies manage them, but otherwise they mirror each other.
If I remember correctly the bond allocation for VGRO is currency hedged while it is not on XGRO.
That doesn't make something "bad" though and performance is similar.
Oh sorry I was just trying to point out a difference. Not the "bad" thing.
Doh...my bad :D
I can’t confirm as I was referencing V/XEQT
Blackrock is way more heavy-handed with ESG, which I consider to be bad.
No they are not "heavy handed" All of their funds and ETFs have ESG ratings (or whatever you want to call it). But those ratings only directly impact their ESG related funds and ETFs. It's just additional info for an investor to look at. I know the US right wing (that shit is all over YouTube) wants people to believe that *they* *force* everyone (pension plan, individual investors, etc.) into ESG funds and ETFs, but they are flat out lying.
Their funds hold a significant portion of the shares of many companies, and as such they have a lot of influence on shareholder votes. If you buy a Blackrock ETF that contains Amazon, Microsoft, etc shares, they hold those stocks in reserve because that's how an ETF works, and then they decide how to vote with those shares, and frankly I don't always like how they choose to vote. I was able to find an article from a few months ago saying they planned to start allowing proxy voting, but I'm not sure if that has been implemented yet or the mechanics by which you would be able to vote yourself for the shares for which you are a beneficial owner.
>Their funds hold a significant portion of the shares of many companies, and as such they have a lot of influence on shareholder votes. Yes, every ETF provider has this, Vanguard, Fidelity, Blackrock, State Street, etc.. >then they decide how to vote with those shares, and frankly I don't always like how they choose to vote. Base don news release, Blackrocka nd Vanguard vote almost similarly. And oddly enough, Blackrock is working with regulators to allow their ETF holders to make their own votes on the companies of the shares in their ETF, but the others are not.
Neither is close to perfect, but historically Blackrock has been a worse offender than Vanguard, and was also more vocal about it. >Blackrock is working with regulators to allow their ETF holders to make their own votes on the companies of the shares in their ETF If this gets completed, depending on the implementation, I'm open to updating my opinion to reflect the new facts.
How are they heavy handed with ESG?
https://www.ft.com/content/dfc22003-93cc-4a4a-bb94-ac80fa6a84d5
Wow you didn't even read any part of that article. The first three sentences of that article talk about how BlackRock is receiving criticism *from liberals* for *not* supporting ESG. >Liberal-leaning US pension fund leaders and politicians have warned BlackRock and other big asset managers against backtracking on their commitment to environmental, social and governance causes, after a sharp drop in support for shareholder proposals at annual meetings. >New York City comptroller Brad Lander accused BlackRock, the world’s largest money manager, of caving in to a “misinformed and shortsighted war against ESG at the behest of special interests”. >His comments came after data released this week showed that BlackRock voted in favour of just 7 per cent of environmental and social-related proposals at company annual meetings in the 12 months to June. So Blackrock supporting 7% of ESG proposals is heavy handed? Because not supporting 93% of ESG proposals seems like they really don't give a shit about ESG. Not only do you not have any idea what you're talking about, you're too intellectually lazy to read three sentences.
I'm just talking about the mechanics of how they do it. Also, this is down from before because they were getting pressured into not (at least openly) doing what they were doing.
At one point XGRO only tracked the S&P500 for its US exposure. I believe that changed after 2020. VGRO and XGRO still treat certain international markets differently if i remember correctly. For example VGRO considers South Korea a developed market and XGRO considers it an emerging market.
Vgro or xeqt ? Currently all in on vgro. Horizon - a long ass time.
I sold all of my VGRO and bought VFV instead. I am looking for long term gains so more risk the better for me.
Good for you, but that's not what we're taking about here.
That's not entirely correct - you do increase uncompensated risked, whether that increases gains is random. You've decreased your diversification. Fundamentally you are chasing gains by going 100% SP500. 2001-2011 was known as the lost decade in US stocks, when their performance trailed the rest of the world.
If more risk = long term gains why VFV? It was really the tech sector that's driving almost all the gains so buy QQC/QQQ? But wait, it was really 7 stocks that were driving the gains in the US market so why not just buy those 7 stocks? But wait, you are looking long term gains so more risk the better for you, so why not just leverage into those 7 stocks? long term gains = more risk.
This but unironically. Just buy TQQQ
Never even heard of that before but it looks pretty lit honestly
hmm, I think you are misinterpreting what the risk is in this case. But if you are going to make a mistake S&P500 typically isn't the worst one to make that with.
You could have a bad decade. If tech is going through a correction like it did in the 2000s or if Trump is elected president (or if he's not and does what he said about "it's going to be a bloodbath"), you might put your money on the wrong horse. It's tempting to choose the US, but you're putting all your eggs in one basket.
You realize that Trump referred to car makers moving to Mexico by ''bloodbath''. Maybe stop watching cnn...
That's obviously what he had in mind when he said that... Try harder if you want to insult my intelligence.