FTAW & ALLW vs VWRA: Should Singapore Investors Switch to Cheaper Global ETFs? (2026)

Two brand-new FTSE All-World ETFs just launched — and they cost 45% less than VWRA. Here’s the full breakdown for Singapore investors.

Two new global ETFs — the iShares FTSE All-World ETF (FTAW) and the Xtrackers FTSE All-World ETF (ALLW) — have launched on the London Stock Exchange in 2026, both tracking the same FTSE All-World Index as VWRA but at a lower Total Expense Ratio (TER) of 0.12% versus VWRA’s 0.22%. However, their tiny fund sizes, lack of Regular Savings Plan (RSP) support, and unproven track records mean most Singapore investors should stick with VWRA for now.

Not financial advice. All figures are for educational reference only. Data as at June 2026 unless noted.

Table of Contents

What Are FTAW and ALLW?

If you’ve been investing in global ETFs from Singapore, you’ve almost certainly heard of VWRA — Vanguard’s FTSE All-World UCITS ETF. It’s been the default “one-ETF portfolio” for Singapore investors for years. However, two new challengers have arrived in 2026.

The iShares FTSE All-World UCITS ETF (FTAW) launched on 7 May 2026. It’s managed by BlackRock (the world’s largest asset manager) and charges a TER of 0.12% per year. Like VWRA, it tracks the FTSE All-World Index, is domiciled in Ireland, and uses an accumulating structure — meaning dividends are automatically reinvested.

The Xtrackers FTSE All-World UCITS ETF (ALLW) launched slightly earlier on 8 April 2026. It’s managed by DWS (Deutsche Bank’s asset management arm) and also charges 0.12% per year. Same index, same Ireland domicile, same accumulating structure.

Both ETFs are listed on the London Stock Exchange (LSE), Euronext Amsterdam, and XETRA — the same exchanges where Singapore investors typically buy their Ireland-domiciled ETFs through brokers like Interactive Brokers or moomoo Singapore.

In short, FTAW and ALLW are near-identical products to VWRA. The only real difference? They’re cheaper. But as we’ll see, that’s not the whole story.

Key Differences at a Glance

On paper, all three ETFs look almost identical. They track the same 4,000+ stocks across developed and emerging markets, they’re all Ireland-domiciled (which means the same 15% withholding tax rate on US dividends under the Ireland–US tax treaty), and they’re all accumulating. Here’s how they compare:

Source: justETF, iShares, DWS, Vanguard fund factsheets — June 2026

The tax structure is identical across all three. Because they’re all Ireland-domiciled UCITS ETFs, Singapore investors enjoy the same benefits: 15% withholding tax on US dividends (versus 30% for US-domiciled ETFs like VT), no US estate tax exposure, and no capital gains tax in Singapore.

Fee Comparison: How Much Do You Actually Save?

The headline selling point is clear: FTAW and ALLW charge 0.12% per year, while VWRA charges 0.22%. That’s a 0.10 percentage point difference. But what does that actually mean in dollar terms?

Let’s break it down for typical Singapore investor portfolio sizes:

Source: TKN calculation based on published TER figures, June 2026

For most Singapore investors building a portfolio in the SGD 10,000 to SGD 100,000 range, the annual savings are between SGD 10 and SGD 100. That’s real money over a 20–30 year investment horizon — compounded, the 0.10% TER difference could mean thousands of dollars more at retirement. Use our Singapore retirement calculator to model how fee differences compound over your timeline.

However, TER is only one part of the total cost of ownership. Transaction costs, bid-ask spreads, and tracking error also matter — and this is where VWRA’s size advantage kicks in.

Availability and RSP Issues for Singapore Investors

Here’s where things get tricky for Singapore investors. One of the most popular ways to buy VWRA is through FSMOne’s Regular Savings Plan (RSP), which lets you invest a fixed amount every month with low minimum amounts and no commission.

As at June 2026, neither FTAW nor ALLW is available on FSMOne’s RSP platform. That’s a dealbreaker for many Singapore investors who rely on dollar-cost averaging through monthly RSP contributions.

Both ETFs are available on Interactive Brokers (IBKR), where you can buy them manually on the LSE. However, you’ll need to place individual orders each time — there’s no automated monthly buying like FSMOne’s RSP.

For investors using Syfe or robo-advisors, these new ETFs aren’t in their fund universe either. Syfe’s brokerage and portfolio options still centre on VWRA and similar established funds.

The practical reality is this: even if FTAW and ALLW are cheaper, the friction of buying them manually every month — versus the set-and-forget convenience of VWRA via FSMOne RSP — makes them harder to stick with. And for long-term wealth building, consistency matters more than saving 0.10% on fees.

The Catch: Why Lower Fees Aren’t Everything

Tim from Tim Talks Money raised several important points in his video analysis. The fee difference is real, but there are bigger concerns:

1. Tiny fund sizes. VWRA has over USD 45 billion in assets under management. FTAW has about USD 19 million. ALLW has about USD 23 million. That’s a difference of roughly 2,000x. Why does this matter? Larger funds typically have tighter bid-ask spreads (meaning you pay less when buying and selling), better tracking of the underlying index, and lower risk of fund closure.

2. No track record. VWRA has been around since 2019 — seven years of data showing how well it tracks the FTSE All-World Index. FTAW has existed for about six weeks. ALLW for about two months. You can’t assess tracking error, tracking difference, or how the fund behaves during market stress without a track record.

3. Wider bid-ask spreads. Because of their small size, FTAW and ALLW may have wider bid-ask spreads than VWRA. For a Singapore investor buying on the LSE through IBKR, a wider spread could easily wipe out the 0.10% TER savings — especially on smaller orders. That said, spreads typically narrow as a fund grows.

4. Securities lending. Some ETF providers use securities lending to offset costs and improve returns. VWRA does this and passes some of the income back to investors. It’s unclear whether FTAW and ALLW will generate meaningful securities lending income at their current size.

The Invesco FTSE All-World ETF (FTWG), which launched in 2023 with a 0.15% TER, is a useful reference point. It’s grown to about USD 3.4 billion in AUM — respectable, but still a fraction of VWRA. It took almost three years to reach that size. FTAW and ALLW will likely follow a similar slow-growth trajectory.

Should You Switch From VWRA?

This is the question every Singapore VWRA investor is asking. The short answer: probably not yet.

If you’re already invested in VWRA, selling your existing holdings to buy FTAW or ALLW would trigger transaction costs (IBKR commissions, FX conversion fees, bid-ask spreads on both the sell and buy sides). Those switching costs would likely exceed several years’ worth of TER savings. You’d need to hold the cheaper ETF for years just to break even on the switch.

If you’re using FSMOne RSP for VWRA, there’s no reason to switch. The convenience and discipline of automated monthly investing far outweigh a 0.10% fee difference. If you’re building a passive income portfolio in Singapore, consistency is your biggest edge.

If you’re starting fresh with a lump sum on IBKR, and you’re comfortable with a brand-new fund, then FTAW or ALLW could make sense. You’d save on fees from day one with no switching costs. However, you’d be taking on the risks of a small, unproven fund.

Who Should Consider FTAW or ALLW?

These new ETFs aren’t for everyone. Here’s a practical breakdown:

FTAW or ALLW might suit you if:

• You’re a new investor starting from scratch on IBKR with no existing VWRA position
• You invest in lump sums rather than monthly RSP contributions
• Your portfolio is large enough (SGD 200k+) that 0.10% savings is meaningful
• You’re comfortable being an early adopter and don’t mind limited track record data
• You understand that you may need to switch again if the fund doesn’t attract enough AUM

Stick with VWRA if:

• You use FSMOne’s RSP for automated monthly investing
• You value a proven 7-year track record and USD 45B+ in AUM
• Your portfolio is under SGD 100k (the fee savings are minimal)
• You want the peace of mind that comes with the world’s second-largest ETF provider
• You don’t want to worry about fund closure risk

It’s also worth noting that Vanguard has historically reduced fees over time as competition increases. VWRA’s TER dropped from 0.25% to 0.22% in recent years. The launch of FTAW and ALLW may push Vanguard to cut fees further — so VWRA investors could benefit from this competition without switching at all.

The Bigger Picture: ETF Fee Wars Are Good for Investors

Whether you buy FTAW, ALLW, or stick with VWRA, the real story here is that competition is driving global ETF costs down. For Singapore investors, this is excellent news.

Five years ago, the cheapest way to get global equity exposure through an Ireland-domiciled ETF was VWRA at 0.22%. Today, you have multiple options at 0.12%–0.15%. That’s a 45% fee reduction in just a few years.

If you’re exploring which brokerage account to open in Singapore for ETF investing, IBKR remains the most cost-effective option for buying LSE-listed ETFs. For beginners who prefer simplicity, the Endowus or Syfe platforms offer managed portfolios that include similar global equity exposure — though at higher total costs.

The bottom line? Don’t let the fee comparison distract you from what matters most: getting invested, staying invested, and adding to your portfolio regularly. Whether you pay 0.12% or 0.22% per year, you’re still getting global diversification across 4,000+ stocks for pennies on the dollar. That’s the real win.

Not financial advice. The Kopi Notes may earn referral fees from some platforms mentioned. All data as at June 2026.

Frequently Asked Questions

Ready to Start Investing in Global ETFs?

Open a brokerage account and start building your global portfolio today. Use our referral links for exclusive sign-up bonuses.