Morningstar
RecommendedSign Up to Our Newsletters Open Window IconMorningstar's Guide to Investing in Stocks Arrow Right
Special Report

The Best and Worst Performing Thematic Funds in the UK

Blockchain exposure has helped returns, while energy transition funds have struggled

Sunniva Kolostyak 15 April, 2024 | 12:19PM
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn
Font-Size

abstract image

Investing in a thematic fund is an easy way to gain exposure to a trend you believe in, but how are these funds really performing? As part of our special report week on thematic investing, we reveal are the best and worst returning funds of the past year.

There are 444 open-ended and exchange-traded funds that are accessible to UK investors. For this article, we have looked at the one-year performance of the 295 open-ended thematic funds as well as the 149 thematic ETFs that are available for sale to UK investors. For open-ended funds, returns vary by over 110% from 71% to -42%. Meanwhile, for thematic ETFs, the range of returns vary by 200%, from growing by 141% to losing 59%.

We have previously asked whether unique ETFs like thematics are investable, and whether they should play a role in your portfolio. Morningstar’s senior analyst Kenneth Lamont then pointed out that if you are looking to invest in themed funds, even more diligence and research is needed than normal.

He said: “Remain sceptical. Investors should look beyond a compelling narrative when assessing these funds. Understand how the fund tracks its chosen theme, is it worth the extra fee? Crucially, understand that these funds can provide outsized returns, but this comes with significant risk and that they should only form a small portion of a portfolio.”

The Best Performing Thematic Funds

VanEck Crypto&Blckchan Innovtr ETF A USD

• Morningstar Category: EAA Fund Sector Equity Technology
• Sub-Theme: Blockchain
• Medalist Rating: Bronze

The passively managed VanEck Crypto & Blockchain Innovators UCITS ETF (DAPP) ended the past year up 141.96%, outperforming the average fund in the equity technology category, which rose 25.67%. The £101.9 million fund has gained 12.92% year to date, while the average fund in its category is up 8.56%.

Global X Blockchain ETF USD Acc

• Morningstar Category: EAA Fund Sector Equity Technology
• Sub-Theme: Blockchain
• Medalist Rating: Bronze

Over the past year, the passively managed Global X Blockchain UCITS ETF (BKCH) rose 129.9%, while the average equity technology fund gained 25.67%. The £11.7 million fund has climbed 10.54% year to date, outperforming the average fund in its category, which rose 8.56%.

WisdomTree Blockchain UCITS ETF USD Acc

• Morningstar Category: EAA Fund Other Equity
• Sub-Theme: Blockchain
• Medalist Rating: None

The WisdomTree Blockchain UCITS ETF USD Acc (WBLK) was launched in 2022. Over the past one year, the ETF was up 103.15%. Meanwhile, from the start of 2024 to the end of March, the fund grew 17.95%. The £2.8 million fund is the third best performer so far this year of the thematic top 10.

iShares Blockchain Technology ETF USDCap

• Morningstar Category: EAA Fund Sector Equity Technology
• Sub-Theme: Blockchain
• Medalist Rating: Gold

The passively managed iShares Blockchain Technology UCITS ETF (BLKC) ended the past year up 91.21%, outperforming the average fund in the equity technology category, which rose 25.67%. The £38.7 million fund has lost 4.94% year to date, while the average fund in its category is up 8.56%.

Grayscale Future of Finance ETF USD Acc

• Morningstar Category: EAA Fund Sector Equity Financial Services
• Sub-Theme: Blockchain
• Medalist Rating: Neutral

The £1.3 million Grayscale Future of Finance UCITS ETF (GFOF) rose 77.22% over the past year. The gain on the passively managed fund beat the 25.88% gain on the average fund in the equity financial services category. Year to date, the HANetf fund is up 5.86%, while the average fund in its category is up 9.6%.

The Worst Performing Thematic Funds

Electric Vehicle Charging Infras ETF Acc

• Morningstar Category: EAA Fund Sector Equity Infrastructure
• Sub-Theme: Charging Infrastructure
• Medalist Rating: Bronze

Over the past year, the passively managed Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure UCITS ETF (ELEC) fell 59.19%, while the average equity infrastructure fund lost 0.78%. The £1.1 million fund has dropped 18.35% year to date, underperforming the average fund in its category, which rose 0.11%.

Global X Hydrogen ETF USD Acc

• Morningstar Category: EAA Fund Sector Other Equity
• Sub-Theme: Hydrogen Economy
• Medalist Rating: None

Global X Hydrogen ETF USD Acc (HYGN) tracks the Solactive Global Hydrogen v2 USD index and over the past one year period, it has fallen 51.93%. The £3.6 million ETF, which launched in 2022, fell 20.29% this year alone.

Invesco Solar Energy ETF

• Morningstar Category: EAA Fund Sector Alternative Energy
• Sub-Theme: Solar
• Medalist Rating: Neutral

Over the past year, the passively managed Invesco Solar Energy UCITS ETF (ISUN) fell 42.99%, while the average equity alternative energy fund lost 17.57%. The £51.1 million fund has dropped 14.58% year to date, falling further than the average fund in its category, which fell 4.77%.

Global X Solar ETF USD Acc

• Morningstar Category: EAA Fund Sector Alternative Energy
• Sub-Theme: Solar
• Medalist Rating: Neutral

The passively managed Global X Solar UCITS ETF (RAYZ) ended the past year down 42.5%, falling further than the average fund in the equity alternative energy category, which fell 17.57%. The £2.5 million fund has lost 9.48% year to date, while the average fund in its category is down 4.77%.

BNP Paribas Env Abs Rtn Th Eq EAR Cl C

• Morningstar Category: EAA Fund Long/Short Equity – Global
• Sub-Theme: Broad Thematic
• Medalist Rating: None

BNP Paribas Environmental Absolute Return Thematic Equity is the worst performer out of three open-ended funds in the bottom 10 list, losing 42.46% over the past one year, 22.40% of which was this year. The £12.5 million fund has an ongoing charge of 1.83% and is the cheapest of the three active funds.

As part of our mission to put more information into the hands of investors, this article was partially generated by Wordsmith, an automated smart-text platform, using Morningstar’s data. Written and edited by Sunniva Kolostyak. 

Get the Latest Fund Insights in Your Inbox

Sign up to Our Newsletters Now

TAGS

The information contained within is for educational and informational purposes ONLY. It is not intended nor should it be considered an invitation or inducement to buy or sell a security or securities noted within nor should it be viewed as a communication intended to persuade or incite you to buy or sell security or securities noted within. Any commentary provided is the opinion of the author and should not be considered a personalised recommendation. The information contained within should not be a person's sole basis for making an investment decision. Please contact your financial professional before making an investment decision.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn
Font-Size

About Author

Sunniva Kolostyak

Sunniva Kolostyak  is data journalist for Morningstar.co.uk

© Copyright 2024 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Terms of Use        Privacy Policy        Modern Slavery Statement        Cookie Settings        Disclosures

The Morningstar Star Rating for Stocks is assigned based on an analyst's estimate of a stocks fair value. It is projection/opinion and not a statement of fact. Morningstar assigns star ratings based on an analyst’s estimate of a stock's fair value. Four components drive the Star Rating: (1) our assessment of the firm’s economic moat, (2) our estimate of the stock’s fair value, (3) our uncertainty around that fair value estimate and (4) the current market price. This process culminates in a single-point star rating that is updated daily. A 5-star represents a belief that the stock is a good value at its current price; a 1-star stock isn't. If our base-case assumptions are true the market price will converge on our fair value estimate over time, generally within three years. Investments in securities are subject to market and other risks. Past performance of a security may or may not be sustained in future and is no indication of future performance. For detail information about the Morningstar Star Rating for Stocks, please visit here

Quantitative Fair Value Estimate represents Morningstar’s estimate of the per share dollar amount that a company’s equity is worth today. The Quantitative Fair Value Estimate is based on a statistical model derived from the Fair Value Estimate Morningstar’s equity analysts assign to companies which includes a financial forecast of the company. The Quantitative Fair Value Estimate is calculated daily. It is a projection/opinion and not a statement of fact. Investments in securities are subject to market and other risks. Past performance of a security may or may not be sustained in future and is no indication of future performance. For detail information about the Quantiative Fair Value Estimate, please visit here

The Morningstar Medalist Rating is the summary expression of Morningstar’s forward-looking analysis of investment strategies as offered via specific vehicles using a rating scale of Gold, Silver, Bronze, Neutral, and Negative. The Medalist Ratings indicate which investments Morningstar believes are likely to outperform a relevant index or peer group average on a risk-adjusted basis over time. Investment products are evaluated on three key pillars (People, Parent, and Process) which, when coupled with a fee assessment, forms the basis for Morningstar’s conviction in those products’ investment merits and determines the Medalist Rating they’re assigned. Pillar ratings take the form of Low, Below Average, Average, Above Average, and High. Pillars may be evaluated via an analyst’s qualitative assessment (either directly to a vehicle the analyst covers or indirectly when the pillar ratings of a covered vehicle are mapped to a related uncovered vehicle) or using algorithmic techniques. Vehicles are sorted by their expected performance into rating groups defined by their Morningstar Category and their active or passive status. When analysts directly cover a vehicle, they assign the three pillar ratings based on their qualitative assessment, subject to the oversight of the Analyst Rating Committee, and monitor and reevaluate them at least every 14 months. When the vehicles are covered either indirectly by analysts or by algorithm, the ratings are assigned monthly. For more detailed information about these ratings, including their methodology, please go to here

The Morningstar Medalist Ratings are not statements of fact, nor are they credit or risk ratings. The Morningstar Medalist Rating (i) should not be used as the sole basis in evaluating an investment product, (ii) involves unknown risks and uncertainties which may cause expectations not to occur or to differ significantly from what was expected, (iii) are not guaranteed to be based on complete or accurate assumptions or models when determined algorithmically, (iv) involve the risk that the return target will not be met due to such things as unforeseen changes in changes in management, technology, economic development, interest rate development, operating and/or material costs, competitive pressure, supervisory law, exchange rate, tax rates, exchange rate changes, and/or changes in political and social conditions, and (v) should not be considered an offer or solicitation to buy or sell the investment product. A change in the fundamental factors underlying the Morningstar Medalist Rating can mean that the rating is subsequently no longer accurate.

For information on the historical Morningstar Medalist Rating for any managed investment Morningstar covers, please contact your local Morningstar office.

For more detailed information about conflicts of interest, including EU MAR disclosures, please see the “Morningstar Medalist Rating Analyst Conflict of Interest & Other Disclosures for EMEA”here

Select Your Site Edition To make sure the site is relevant to you, we need to know if you’re an individual investor or a financial professional.