The Best- and Worst-Performing ETFs for the Quarter

To
find
the
quarter’s
best-
and
worst-performing
ETFs,
we
screened
those
in
Morningstar’s
equity,
allocation,
or
fixed-income
categories
that
are
available
in
the
UK.
We
excluded
exchange-traded
notes,
known
as
ETNs,
and
ETFs
with
less
than
$25
million
(£19.9
million)
in
total
assets.
We
also
excluded
funds
that
fall
into
Morningstar’s
“trading”
categories,
as
these
funds
are
designed
for
active
traders
and
are
not
suitable
for
long-term
investors.

Returns
for
the
best-
and
worst-performing
ETFs
ranged
from
34.9%
to
negative
16.7%,
a
gap
of
51.6
percentage
points.

The
10
Best-Performing
ETFs
for
Q1
2024

1.
Amundi
MSCI
Semiconductors
ESG
Screened
UCITS
ETF
(CHIP)
2.
VanEck
Semiconductor
UCITS
ETF
(SMH)
3.
VanEck
Defense
ETF
(DFNS)
4.
iShares
Edge
MSCI
USA
Momentum
Factor
UCITS
ETF
(IUMO)
5.
HSBC
NASDAQ
Global
Semiconductor
UCITS
ETF
(HNSS)
6.
Xtrackers
MSCI
World
Momentum
UCITS
ETF
(XDEM)
7.
iShares
Edge
MSCI
World
Momentum
Factor
UCITS
ETF
(IWMO)
8.
Invesco
CoinShares
Global
Blockchain
UCITS
ETF
(BCHN)
9.
iShares
MSCI
Global
Semiconductors
UCITS
ETF
(SEMI)
10.
Invesco
Dow
Jones
US
Insurance
UCITS
ETF
(INSU)

The
10
Worst-Performing
ETFs
for
Q1
2024

1.
VanEck
Rare
Earth
and
Strategic
Metals
UCITS
ETF
(REMX)
2.
Invesco
Solar
Energy
UCITS
ETF
(ISUN)
3.
Global
X
Lithium
&
Battery
Tech
UCITS
ETF
(LITU)
4.
Invesco
Markets
II
PLC
–
Invesco
Global
Clean
Energy
UCITS
ETF
(GCLE)
5.
iShares
Global
Clean
Energy
UCITS
ETF
(INRG)
6.
Xtrackers
MSCI
Thailand
UCITS
ETF
(XCS4)
7.
iShares
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
USD
(Dist)
(IBZL)
8.
Amundi
MSCI
China
Tech
ESG
Screened
UCITS
ETF
(CC1)
9.
Amundi
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
(RIO)
10.
iShares
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
(DE)
(4BRZ)

Metrics
for
the
Best-Performing
ETFs

Amundi
MSCI
Semiconductors
ESG
Screened
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
N/A
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.45%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Technology

The
£346
million
Amundi
MSCI
Semiconductors
ESG
Screened
UCITS
ETF
was
the
best-performing
ETF
in
the
first
quarter,
with
a
34.9%
return.
The
return
on
the
passively
managed
Amundi
ETF
topped
the
8.5%
gain
on
the
average
fund
in
Morningstar’s
equity
technology
category
for
the
quarter.
Over
the
last
12
months,
the
Amundi
MSCI
Semiconductors
ESG
Screened
UCITS
ETF
has
returned
77%,
outperforming
the
25.6%
gain
on
the
average
fund
in
its
category,
leaving
the
ETF
in
the
2nd
percentile.

The
Amundi
MSCI
Semiconductors
ESG
Screened
UCITS
ETF
takes
environmental,
social,
and
governance

criteria
into
consideration.
This
fund
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Silver.

VanEck
Semiconductor
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
5
stars
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.35%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Technology

The
second-best
performing
ETF
in
the
first
quarter
was
the
£1.4
billion
VanEck
Semiconductor
UCITS
ETF.
The
passively
managed
VanEck
ETF
returned
23.8%,
outperforming
the
average
equity
technology
fund,
which
gained
8.5%.
Looking
back
over
the
last
12
months,
the
VanEck
Semiconductor
UCITS
ETF
has
returned
60.3%,
outperforming
the
25.6%
return
on
the
average
fund
in
its
category,
leaving
the
ETF
in
the
4th
percentile.

The
Silver-rated
VanEck
Semiconductor
UCITS
ETF
was
launched
in
December
2020.

VanEck
Defense
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
N/A
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.55%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Industrial
Materials

The
£389
million
VanEck
Defense
ETF
ranked
third
for
the
quarter,
returning
22.5%.
The
VanEck
ETF,
which
is
passively
managed,
topped
the
5.6%
average
return
on
funds
in
the
equity
industrial
materials
category
for
the
first
quarter.
The
fund
was
first
launched
in
March
2023,
and
as
a
result,
it
does
not
have
a
one-year
track
record.

The
VanEck
Defense
ETF
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Bronze.

iShares
Edge
MSCI
USA
Momentum
Factor
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
2
stars
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.20%
•
Morningstar
Category:
US
Large-Cap
Growth
Equity

With
a
21.3%
return,
the
£282
million
iShares
Edge
MSCI
USA
Momentum
Factor
UCITS
ETF
ranked
fourth
in
the
quarter.
The
passively
managed
iShares
ETF
outperformed
the
11.7%
return
on
the
average
US
large-cap-cap
growth
equity
fund.
Over
the
last
12
months,
the
fund
has
gained
34.1%,
ahead
of
the
31.1%
return
on
funds
in
its
category,
placing
it
in
the
41st
percentile
for
the
period.

The
iShares
Edge
MSCI
USA
Momentum
Factor
UCITS
ETF
has
a
Silver
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating.
It
was
launched
in
October
2016.

HSBC
NASDAQ
Global
Semiconductor
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
N/A
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.35%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Technology

The
fifth-best
performing
ETF
was
the
£29
million
HSBC
NASDAQ
Global
Semiconductor
UCITS
ETF,
which
gained
21.3%
in
the
first
quarter.
This
passively
managed
HSBC
ETF
beat
the
8.5%
average
return
on
funds
in
the
equity
technology
category.
Over
the
past
year,
the
HSBC
NASDAQ
Global
Semiconductor
UCITS
ETF
rose
54.4%,
outperforming
the
25.6%
return
on
the
average
fund
in
its
category
and
placing
it
in
the
5th
percentile.

The
HSBC
NASDAQ
Global
Semiconductor
UCITS
ETF,
launched
in
January
2022,
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Bronze.

Xtrackers
MSCI
World
Momentum
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
4
stars
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.15%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Global
Large-Cap
Growth
Equity

The
£1
billion
Xtrackers
MSCI
World
Momentum
UCITS
ETF
was
the
sixth-best
performing
UK
ETF
in
the
first
quarter,
with
a
21%
return.
The
return
on
the
passively
managed
Xtrackers
ETF
topped
the
9.1%
gain
on
the
average
fund
in
Morningstar’s
global
large-cap
growth
equity
category.
Looking
back
over
the
last
12
months,
the
Xtrackers
MSCI
World
Momentum
UCITS
ETF
has
returned
32.8%,
outperforming
the
19.3%
return
on
the
average
fund
in
its
category,
leaving
the
ETF
in
the
5th
percentile.

The
Gold-rated
Xtrackers
MSCI
World
Momentum
UCITS
ETF
was
launched
in
September
2014.

iShares
Edge
MSCI
World
Momentum
Factor
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
4
stars
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.30%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Global
Large-Cap
Growth
Equity

The
seventh-best
performing
ETF
in
the
first
quarter
was
the
£1.6
billion
iShares
Edge
MSCI
World
Momentum
Factor
UCITS
ETF.
The
passively
managed
iShares
ETF
returned
21%,
outperforming
the
average
global
large-cap
growth
equity
fund,
which
gained
9.1%.
Looking
back
over
the
last
12
months,
the
iShares
Edge
MSCI
World
Momentum
Factor
UCITS
ETF
has
returned
32.7%,
outperforming
the
19.3%
return
on
the
average
fund
in
its
category,
leaving
the
ETF
in
the
6th
percentile.

The
iShares
Edge
MSCI
World
Momentum
Factor
UCITS
ETF
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Gold.
It
was
launched
in
October
2014.

Invesco
CoinShares
Global
Blockchain
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
1
star
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.65%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Technology

The
£561
million
Invesco
CoinShares
Global
Blockchain
UCITS
ETF
ranked
eighth
for
the
quarter,
returning
20.7%.
The
Invesco
ETF,
which
is
passively
managed,
topped
the
8.5%
average
gain
on
funds
in
the
equity
technology
category.
Over
the
last
12
months,
the
Invesco
ETF
has
returned
61.5%,
ahead
of
the
25.6%
return
on
the
average
fund
in
its
category,
leaving
it
in
the
4th
percentile
for
performance.

The
Bronze-rated
Invesco
CoinShares
Global
Blockchain
UCITS
ETF
was
launched
in
March
2019.

iShares
MSCI
Global
Semiconductors
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
N/A
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.35%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Technology

With
a
19.6%
gain,
the
£886
million
iShares
MSCI
Global
Semiconductors
UCITS
ETF
ranked
ninth
in
the
first
quarter.
The
passively
managed
iShares
ETF
outperformed
the
8.5%
return
on
the
average
equity
technology
fund.
Over
the
last
12
months,
the
fund
has
returned
49.5%,
ahead
of
the
25.6%
return
on
funds
in
its
category,
placing
it
in
the
8th
percentile.

The
iShares
MSCI
Global
Semiconductors
UCITS
ETF,
launched
in
August
2021,
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Gold.

Invesco
Dow
Jones
US
Insurance
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
N/A
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.35%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Financial
Services

The
tenth-best
performing
ETF
was
the
£165
million
Invesco
Dow
Jones
US
Insurance
UCITS
ETF,
which
gained
18.5%
in
the
first
quarter.
The
passively
managed
Invesco
ETF
beat
the
9.3%
average
return
on
funds
in
the
equity
financial
services
category.
The
fund
was
first
launched
in
July
2023,
and
as
a
result,
it
does
not
have
a
one-year
track
record.

The
Invesco
Dow
Jones
US
Insurance
UCITS
ETF
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Bronze.

Metrics
for
the
Worst-Performing
ETFs

VanEck
Rare
Earth
and
Strategic
Metals
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
N/A
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.59%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Precious
Metals

The
worst
performing
ETF
in
the
first
quarter
was
the
£68
million
VanEck
Rare
Earth
and
Strategic
Metals
UCITS
ETF,
which
lost
16.7%.
The
passively
managed
VanEck
ETF
underperformed
the
average
0.3%
gain
on
funds
in
the
equity
precious
metals
category
in
the
first
quarter.
Over
the
past
12
months,
the
VanEck
Rare
Earth
and
Strategic
Metals
UCITS
ETF
fell
38.8%,
placing
it
in
the
100th
percentile
within
its
category
and
falling
further
than
the
6.5%
loss
on
the
average
fund.

The
VanEck
Rare
Earth
and
Strategic
Metals
UCITS
ETF,
launched
in
September
2021,
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Bronze.

Invesco
Solar
Energy
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
N/A
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.69%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Alternative
Energy

With
a
14.6%
loss,
the
£53
million
Invesco
Solar
Energy
UCITS
ETF
was
the
second-worst
performing
ETF
on
our
list
for
the
first
quarter.
The
passively
managed
Invesco
ETF
fell
further
than
the
average
5.1%
loss
on
funds
in
the
equity
alternative
energy
category.
Over
the
past
12
months,
the
Invesco
Solar
Energy
UCITS
ETF
lost
43%,
placing
it
in
the
100th
percentile
within
its
category
and
falling
further
than
the
18.1%
loss
on
the
average
fund.

The
Neutral-rated
Invesco
Solar
Energy
UCITS
ETF
was
launched
in
August
2021.

Global
X
Lithium
&
Battery
Tech
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
N/A
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.60%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Natural
Resources

The
third-worst
performing
ETF
in
the
first
quarter
was
the
£27
million
Global
X
Lithium
&
Battery
Tech
UCITS
ETF,
which
fell
10.9%.
The
Global
X
ETF,
which
is
passively
managed,
underperformed
the
average
1.3%
gain
on
funds
in
the
equity
natural
resources
category.
Over
the
past
12
months,
the
ETF
fell
29.1%
to
place
in
the
98th
percentile
within
its
category,
falling
further
than
the
category’s
average
1-year
loss
of
0.3%.

The
Global
X
Lithium
&
Battery
Tech
UCITS
ETF
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Bronze.
It
was
launched
in
December
2021.

Invesco
Markets
II
PLC
–
Invesco
Global
Clean
Energy
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
N/A
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.60%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Alternative
Energy

The
£34
million
Invesco
Markets
II
PLC
–
Invesco
Global
Clean
Energy
UCITS
ETF
was
the
fourth-worst
performing
ETF
in
the
first
quarter,
with
a
loss
of
10.8%.
The
passively
managed
Invesco
ETF
performed
worse
than
the
average
5.1%
loss
on
funds
in
the
equity
alternative
energy
category.
Over
the
past
year,
the
ETF
dropped
28.5%
to
land
in
the
73rd
percentile
within
its
category,
dropping
further
than
the
category’s
average
one-year
loss
of
18.1%.

The
Neutral-rated
Invesco
Markets
II
PLC
–
Invesco
Global
Clean
Energy
UCITS
ETF
was
launched
in
March
2021.

iShares
Global
Clean
Energy
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
2
stars
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.65%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Equity
Alternative
Energy

Fifth-worst
was
the
£2.6
billion
iShares
Global
Clean
Energy
UCITS
ETF,
which
lost
9.7%
in
the
first
quarter.
The
passively
managed
iShares
ETF
fell
further
than
the
average
5.1%
decline
on
funds
in
the
equity
alternative
energy
category.
Over
the
past
year,
the
iShares
Global
Clean
Energy
UCITS
ETF
fell
30%,
finishing
in
the
78th
percentile
within
its
category.
It
dropped
further
than
the
category’s
average
one-year
loss
of
18.1%.

The
iShares
Global
Clean
Energy
UCITS
ETF
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Silver.
It
was
launched
in
July
2007.

Xtrackers
MSCI
Thailand
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
4
stars
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.25%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Thailand
Equity

The
sixth-worst
performing
ETF
in
the
first
quarter
was
the
£50
million
Xtrackers
MSCI
Thailand
UCITS
ETF,
which
lost
8.2%.
The
passively
managed
Xtrackers
ETF
performed
roughly
in
line
with
the
average
7.3%
loss
on
funds
in
the
Thailand
equity
category.
Over
the
past
12
months,
the
Xtrackers
MSCI
Thailand
UCITS
ETF
fell
19.1%,
placing
it
in
the
75th
percentile
within
its
category
and
falling
further
than
the
17.8%
loss
on
the
average
fund.

The
Xtrackers
MSCI
Thailand
UCITS
ETF
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Bronze.
It
was
launched
in
June
2010.

iShares
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
USD
(Dist)

•
Morningstar
Rating:
3
stars
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.74%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Brazil
Equity

With
a
7.1%
loss,
the
£272
million
iShares
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
USD
(Dist)
was
the
seventh-worst
performing
ETF
on
our
list
for
the
first
quarter.
The
passively
managed
iShares
ETF
fell
further
than
the
average
5.8%
loss
on
funds
in
the
Brazil
equity
category.
Over
the
past
12
months,
the
iShares
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
USD
(Dist)
gained
22.7%,
placing
it
in
the
56th
percentile
within
its
category
and
outperforming
the
21%
return
on
the
average
fund.

The
iShares
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
USD
(Dist),
launched
in
November
2005,
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Bronze.

Amundi
MSCI
China
Tech
ESG
Screened
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
3
stars
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.55%
•
Morningstar
Category:
China
Equity

The
eighth-worst
performing
ETF
in
the
first
quarter
was
the
£48
million
Amundi
MSCI
China
Tech
ESG
Screened
UCITS
ETF,
which
fell
6.8%.
The
Amundi
ETF,
which
is
passively
managed,
fell
further
than
the
average
1.8%
loss
on
funds
in
the
China
equity
category.
Over
the
past
12
months,
the
ETF
fell
23.1%
to
place
in
the
71st
percentile
within
its
category,
dropping
further
than
the
average
one-year
loss
of
21.4%.

The
Amundi
MSCI
China
Tech
ESG
Screened
UCITS
ETF,
launched
in
April
2018,
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Neutral.

Amundi
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF

•
Morningstar
Rating:
4
stars
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.65%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Brazil
Equity

The
£322
million
Amundi
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
was
the
ninth-worst
performing
ETF
in
the
first
quarter,
with
a
decline
of
6.7%.
The
passively
managed
Amundi
ETF
performed
roughly
in
line
with
the
average
5.8%
loss
on
funds
in
the
Brazil
equity
category.
Over
the
past
year,
the
ETF
gained
23.5%
to
land
in
the
44th
percentile,
outperforming
the
category’s
average
one-year
return
of
21%.

The
Amundi
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
has
a
Morningstar
Medalist
Rating
of
Bronze.
It
was
launched
in
March
2019.

iShares
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
(DE)

•
Morningstar
Rating:
4
stars
•
Expense
Ratio:
0.25%
•
Morningstar
Category:
Brazil
Equity

Tenth-worst
was
the
£2.4
billion
iShares
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
(DE),
which
lost
6.6%
in
the
first
quarter.
The
passively
managed
iShares
ETF
performed
roughly
in
line
with
the
average
5.8%
loss
on
funds
in
the
Brazil
equity
category
for
the
quarter.
Over
the
past
year,
the
iShares
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
(DE)
rose
23.7%,
finishing
the
12-month
period
in
the
28th
percentile
within
the
Brazil
equity
category.
It
outperformed
the
category’s
average
one-year
return
of
21%.

The
Gold-rated
iShares
MSCI
Brazil
UCITS
ETF
(DE)
was
launched
in
October
2018.

What
Are
ETFs?

Exchange-traded
funds
are
investments
that
trade
throughout
the
day
on
stock
exchanges,
much
like
individual
stocks.
They
differ
from
traditional
mutual
funds
–
known
as
open-end
funds
–
which
can
only
be
bought
or
sold
at
a
single
price
each
day.
Historically,
ETFs
have
tracked
indexes,
but
in
recent
years,
more
ETFs
have
been
actively
managed.
ETFs
cover
a
range
of
asset
classes,
including
stocks,
bonds,
commodities,
and
most
recently
cryptocurrency.

The
Best
ETFs:
More
Ideas
to
Consider

Investors
who
would
like
to
find
more
of
the
top-performing
or
cheapest
ETFs
can
do
the
following:

•
Read
the
latest

articles
on
ETFs.

•
Use
the

ETF
screener
to
find
the
best
ETFs
according
to
your
specific
criteria.
You
can
search
for
funds
based
on
their
fees,
Morningstar
Medalist
Ratings,
manager
tenures,
and
more.

•

Compare
funds
and
ETFs
side
by
side
and
easily
follow
their
valuations,
ratings,
and
fees.

This
article
was
compiled
by
Bella
Albrecht,
edited
by
Lauren
Solberg,
and
reviewed
by
Sunniva
Kolostyak.

As
part
of
our
mission
to
put
more
information
into
the
hands
of
investors,
this
article
was
compiled
from
Morningstar’s
data
and
independent
research
using
automation
technology.
The
original
article
was
written
by
Morningstar
reporters
and
editors.
This
updated
version
was
reviewed
by
an
editor.