Funds & Illusions: A Skeptic’s View

by

They offer these funds, these little boxes of promises. The State Street SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF – a mouthful, isn’t it? – and the iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF. Both claim to build fortunes, to offer a path for the working man. But a closer look reveals the same old game: shifting risk, collecting fees, and hoping someone, somewhere, makes a profit. Let us not mistake motion for progress.

The Cost of Hope

NZAC

Metric IEFA
Issuer SPDR iShares
Expense Ratio 0.12% 0.07%
1-yr Return (as of Feb. 7, 2026) 15.11% 28.70%
Dividend Yield 1.88% 3.32%
Beta 1.05 0.79
AUM $182.12 million $171.77 billion

A pittance for expenses, they say. A mere fraction. But fractions add up. The iShares fund, cheaper, yields more now. A small comfort, perhaps, for those who rely on such things. The difference in holdings, though, is a matter of illusion. One boasts of ‘climate alignment’, the other of broad market access. Both are merely collections of shares, subject to the whims of fortune and the maneuvers of larger players.

The Dance of Numbers

Metric NZAC IEFA
Max Drawdown (5 y) -28.29% -30.41%
Growth of $1,000 over 5 years $1,499 $1,353

They speak of returns, of growth. As if a few percentage points can truly alter the course of a life. The numbers shift, of course. One year favors this fund, the next that. But the underlying truth remains: these are gambles, dressed up in the language of finance. A thousand dollars grown to fourteen hundred over five years… a modest gain, if any, after accounting for the quiet erosion of inflation.

What Lies Within?

The iShares fund holds pieces of the world, outside of America and Canada. Financial services, industries, healthcare… the usual suspects. ASML, Roche, HSBC… names that mean little to the man on the street, but much to those who profit from their operations. The ‘climate aligned’ fund, meanwhile, favors technology and American companies. Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft… giants built on the backs of countless workers, now lauded for their ‘sustainability’. A convenient narrative.

They claim to screen for ‘ESG’ factors, to evaluate companies based on environmental, social, and governance criteria. A fine gesture, perhaps, but does it truly change anything? Does it alleviate the suffering of those exploited to produce the goods and services these companies provide? Or is it merely a marketing ploy, designed to attract a new generation of investors who crave the illusion of ethical consumption?

The Bitter Truth

Choosing between these two funds is a matter of choosing between different shades of the same gray. One offers a slightly higher yield, the other a slightly better long-term return. But both are subject to the vagaries of the market, to the whims of fate. The ‘climate aligned’ fund may perform better over five years, but that is no guarantee of future success. And even if it does, the gains will likely be modest, hardly enough to lift a family out of poverty.

They speak of international exposure, of diversification. But foreign markets are often more volatile, more unpredictable. And while it’s true that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited is held within the ‘climate aligned’ fund, that hardly mitigates the risks inherent in investing in a globalized economy. The worker in Taiwan, the farmer in Brazil, the factory worker in China… their fates are intertwined with our own, yet they receive little of the benefit.

So choose wisely, if you must. But remember this: these funds are not a path to salvation. They are merely tools, designed to enrich those who already have wealth. And for the rest of us, they are just another reminder of the endless cycle of hope and disappointment.

Read More

2026-02-08 15:42