Core Insights - The State Street SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC) focuses on climate-conscious investing with an ESG screening, while the iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) offers broader exposure to emerging markets with higher yield and larger assets under management [1][2] Cost & Size Comparison - NZAC has an expense ratio of 0.12% and AUM of $183.2 million, while IEMG has a lower expense ratio of 0.09% and significantly larger AUM of $138.8 billion [3][4] - The 1-year return for NZAC is 15.8%, compared to IEMG's 35.3%, and the dividend yield for NZAC is 1.9%, while IEMG offers a higher yield of 2.5% [3][4] Performance & Risk Metrics - Over the past five years, NZAC experienced a maximum drawdown of -28.29%, while IEMG had a larger drawdown of -37.16% [5] - An investment of $1,000 in NZAC would have grown to $1,499 over five years, compared to $1,106 for IEMG [5] Portfolio Composition - IEMG holds 2,673 stocks with a sector focus on technology (28%), financial services (21%), and consumer cyclicals (11%), featuring major positions in Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing, Samsung Electronics, and Tencent Holdings [6] - NZAC consists of 688 holdings with a focus on ESG criteria, led by Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft, appealing to investors prioritizing sustainability [7] Investor Implications - IEMG presents advantages for investors with its lower expense ratio, higher dividend yield, and better recent performance, making it attractive for those seeking to enhance dividend income [8]

Core Insights - The article compares two global ETFs: SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC) and iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH), highlighting their differences in cost, yield, and investment focus [1][2] Cost and Size Comparison - NZAC has a lower expense ratio of 0.12% compared to URTH's 0.24%, making it more cost-effective for investors [3][4] - As of December 2, 2025, NZAC has a 1-year return of 12.5% and a dividend yield of 1.9%, while URTH has a 1-year return of 15.0% and a dividend yield of 1.3% [3] - NZAC's assets under management (AUM) are $177.9 million, significantly smaller than URTH's AUM of $6.5 billion [3] Performance and Risk Analysis - Over a five-year period, NZAC experienced a maximum drawdown of -29.6%, while URTH had a drawdown of -26.9% [5] - An investment of $1,000 would have grown to $1,522 in NZAC and $1,682 in URTH over five years, indicating URTH's superior performance despite its higher fees [5] Fund Composition - URTH consists of 1,322 developed-market stocks, with significant holdings in technology (27%), financial services (16%), and industrials (11%), including major companies like Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft [6] - NZAC holds 687 stocks, covering both developed and emerging markets, with a heavier focus on technology (31%) and a climate-focused, ESG-screened approach [7] Investment Focus - The primary distinction between the two funds lies in their investment goals: NZAC targets investors looking to mitigate climate risk, while URTH provides broader exposure to international stocks without sustainability considerations [9][10] - The difference in fees is emphasized as a critical factor for investors, as similar performance can lead to significantly different long-term returns due to the expense ratio disparity [11]