Asset management

ETFs: here’s how sustainable funds invest (and how much they yield) compared to traditional ones

A comparison of five ETFs from the iShares range that employ different investment strategies

by Vitaliano D'Angerio

19 October 2026

Aggiungi Il Sole 24 Ore
ai preferiti su Google

3' min read

Translated by AI

Versione italiana

3' min read

Translated by AI

Versione italiana

Despite Donald Trump’s criticism, sustainable investments continue to play a central role in international portfolios. According to Morningstar data for the second quarter of 2026, global assets in sustainable funds reached $3.7 trillion, with net inflows of $3.7 billion.

However, the considerable confusion caused by the regulations imposed by Eurocrats in this sector has raised many doubts amongst investors. The bar for ESG filters was first raised very high and then, following the anti-green backlash in the US, there was a sharp U-turn.

The comparison

To understand how sustainable products invest today, without getting bogged down in Brussels regulations, a comparison has been carried out between the portfolios of five ETFs from the same investment firm, iShares, one of the sector’s leaders: the sample consists of one traditional ETF and four sustainable variants. The analysis was carried out by Matteo Todeschi, founder of Investimi.com, an independent portal for financial information and education.

The products being monitored are as follows: iShares Core MSCI World (IE00B4L5Y983), iShares MSCI World Screened (IE00BFNM3J75), iShares MSCI World CTB Enhanced ESG (IE00BHZPJ569), iShares MSCI World Paris Aligned Climate (IE00BMXC7W70) and, finally, iShares MSCI World SRI (IE00BYX2JD69). The portfolio data is as at 21 September, whilst the returns are as at 30 September.

‘Screened, CTB and Paris Aligned exclude certain activities and controversies,’ the report explains. Screened retains the weightings as in the World index, whilst CTB and Paris Aligned recalculate them to meet emissions targets. SRI, on the other hand, selects – sector by sector – the companies with the best ESG ratings, covering up to around a quarter of the value of each sector.”

PORTAFOGLI E RENDIMENTI

Results

So what does this comparison reveal? The Screened ETF is the one that most closely resembles the traditional product investing in the MSCI World Index: 92.3 per cent of its portfolio is identical; by contrast, this figure falls to 75.2 per cent for the CTB and to 67.5 per cent for the Paris Aligned product. The proportion shared with the World ETF drops dramatically to 25.4 per cent in the SRI ETF.

As for the top ten positions, they are made up of the usual US big tech stocks. The differences between the ETFs in this case ‘are virtually imperceptible’, apart from the SRI ETF, which includes only two stocks: Nvidia (9 per cent) and Tesla (3.9 per cent), whilst the other major players are absent from this portfolio. It is also worth noting that, of the 1,246 companies included in the traditional ETF – which tracks the MSCI World Index – ‘54 do not appear in any of the four sustainable ETFs and together account for 4.4 per cent of the World Index’. Among these 54 are, for example, in the energy sector, shares such as Chevron, Shell and ConocoPhillips; in the consumer staples sector, some of the best-known include Procter & Gamble, Philip Morris, Nestlé and Unilever.

And it is precisely the energy and essential goods sectors that are among those hardest hit in sustainable ETF portfolios.

Costs and returns

In terms of annual costs, the ETFs analysed all have the same TER (0.20 per cent). The 5-year returns are a bit of a let-down, with the World ETF gaining 11.9 per cent and being outperformed only by the Screened ETF (12.2 per cent). The other three performed less well over the same period: CTB (10.5 per cent), Paris Aligned (9.9 per cent) and SRI (9.4 per cent).

Vitaliano D’Angerioredattore
- @vdangerio
Luogo: Milano
Lingue parlate: italiano, inglese
Argomenti: finanza sostenibile, previdenza
Scheda autore
Trust project