Note: The information contained herein is for information purposes only and does not constitute investment advice or a recommendation.
The short answer to this question is: To make Gerd Kommer’s world portfolio concept easily accessible to any Do-it-yourself investor in a single equity ETF.
The slightly longer answer to the question is: Dr. Gerd Kommer has been writing books on the subject of scientifically oriented capital investment with index funds and ETFs since 1999. With the founding of the asset management company Gerd Kommer Invest (minimum investment amount of EUR 1 million) in 2017 and the robo advisor Gerd Kommer Capital – a digital asset management company (minimum investment amount of EUR 25) – in 2020, he has already provided investors who do not want to take care of their capital investments themselves with two well-established aids on the market to help them implement the world portfolio concept popularized in his books. With the new ETF, we are making this investment approach accessible to investors who want to invest on their own initiative and at the same time are looking for solutions that make their “investment work” easier.
The Gerd Kommer ETF is a pure equity ETF that tracks the risky portfolio part of the world portfolio concept in a single fund (“1-ETF solution”) and brings so-called factor premiums into the securities account (more on this under “Factor Investing” below). “Risky portfolio component” here means “global stock market”. If you want to invest in the form of a return-oriented “100/0 level 1 asset allocation” (100% risky/0% low-risk), we believe that you do not need another ETF in addition to the Gerd Kommer ETF.
If you want to be more conservative (safety-oriented) – for example with a “level 1 asset allocation” (percentage division of a portfolio into a risky part, which is responsible for generating returns in the portfolio, and a low-risk part, which serves as a safety anchor in the overall portfolio) of “90/10”, “80/20”, “70/30” and so on up to “10/90” – you can consider either combining the Gerd Kommer ETF with a bond ETF or covering the low-risk part of the portfolio with interest-bearing overnight money at a bank (see our blog post on overnight money and bond ETFs here). The bond ETF used should exclusively cover short residual maturities of debtors with high credit ratings in the investor’s home currency. For risk reasons, the balance of the call deposit account should not exceed 100,000 euros, the upper limit of the state deposit guarantee in Germany.
The L&G Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity UCITS ETF (“ETF”) is managed by Legal & General Investment Management Limited (“L&G”) and physically replicates the Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity Index (no swap ETF). The index that the ETF tracks is calculated by Solactive AG (“Solactive”) and was developed in 2022/2023 by Gerd Kommer Invest GmbH (“GKI”), L&G and Solactive.
There are no corporate links between GKI, L&G and Solactive, i.e. the shareholders of GKI, L&G and Solactive do not hold shares in the other two companies.
L&G is the legal operator of the ETF and is responsible for B2B marketing. Solactive is responsible for the ongoing maintenance, calculation and administration of the index on which the ETF is based. GKI is responsible for B2C marketing in the private investor market and fundamental questions of investment strategy.
The ETF’s income less costs is divided between GKI and L&G.
The Gerd Kommer ETF is managed by the ETF provider Legal & General Investment Management (“L& G”). L& G is the asset manager of the British Legal & General Group, one of the largest insurance companies in Europe. Legal & General was founded in 1836 and is listed on the FTSE 100 of the London Stock Exchange.
L&G is one of the world’s leading asset managers. As at December 2024, L&G assets under management were worth around EUR 1,350 billion.
Dr. Gerd Kommer is the founder and managing director of an asset management company, Gerd Kommer Invest GmbH (“GKI”) and a company dedicated to financial education, Gerd Kommer GmbH (“GKG”).
Before founding Gerd Kommer Invest in 2017, Gerd Kommer worked for around 24 years in corporate lending and institutional asset management at various banks in Germany, South Africa and the UK. Most recently, he headed the London branch and the Infrastructure & Asset Finance division of a German asset management company until the end of 2016. In this position, he was responsible for a portfolio of structured loans and bonds with a volume of EUR 16 billion. He spent a total of 17 years in other European and non-European countries.
Gerd Kommer studied business administration, tax law, German studies and political science in Germany, the USA and Liechtenstein (M.A., MBA, Dr. rer. pol., LL.M.).
Dr. Gerd Kommer is also a well-known author in German-speaking countries and has published several books on financial advice, which have sold more than 300,000 copies to date. His book Souverän investieren mit Index Fonds und ETFs won the German financial book prize in 2016.
Gerd Kommer Invest GmbH (“GKI”) is a BaFin-regulated asset manager based in Munich. The company was founded in 2017 by Dr. Gerd Kommer.
GKI pursues a strictly scientific and evidence-based investment approach. At no point are forecasts made about security prices or the development of macroeconomic variables (e.g. interest rates or inflation), while investing on the basis of such forecasts is still the standard in the financial sector.
Furthermore, GKI is fanatical about avoiding conflicts of interest, which we see as the “plague of the financial sector” and the cause of many scandals and bankruptcies in the financial sector in recent decades.
As part of its asset management and financial advice, GKI has several hundred clients and manages assets of around one billion euros (as of 2024).
More information about GKI can be found on the following website: https://backup2.gerd-kommer.de/invest/
Solactive AG is a German index provider based in Frankfurt. Solactive is responsible for the ongoing maintenance, calculation and administration of the index on which the ETF is based. There are currently (as of mid-2025) over 700 ETFs worldwide that are linked to the indices calculated by Solactive. Solactive is known for its focus on creating customized indices.
The underlying index is the Solactive Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity Index NTR (DE000SL0G219). As is usual with ETFs, this is a net total return index. This means that dividends are taken into account in relation to a price index. The “Net” stands for the maximum deduction of withholding tax on dividends. If the withholding tax deduction in the ETF is lower, this benefits the ETF assets and thus the investors in full. The index is denominated in USD.
Most ETFs registered in German-speaking countries are domiciled in Germany, Luxembourg or Ireland. However, Ireland currently (as of 2025) has an advantage in the taxation of dividends, particularly from US companies. Investors benefit fully from this advantage. The tax treatment may change in principle. Where advantages exist, these are passed on to the investors.
We have set up a detailed ETF comparison page for this purpose, which focuses in particular on the differences between the Gerd Kommer ETF and its alternatives, including ETFs on the well-known MSCI World Index. The Quarterly Index Summary provides a further comparison of different indices.
With the Gerd Kommer ETF, the Gerd Kommer Group would like to offer for the first time a user-friendly product for those Do-it-yourself investors who have not yet found what they were looking for in the “Gerd Kommer universe”, for example because it is important for them to invest on their own. It is a globally diversified equity ETF, i.e. a fund without the addition of risky or low-risk bonds. Users of the ETF who wish to invest more conservatively than “100/0” (high risk/low risk) must supplement the ETF with an additional low-risk investment component, such as a specific low-risk bond ETF. The ETF was developed as a “one-fund solution” for Do-it-yourself investors. The transaction costs and custody account management costs depend on the individual conditions of the customer’s bank or broker. The operational risk of implementing the transactions is also borne by the end customer.
The Gerd Kommer Capital (GKC) robo advisor (digital asset management) is a complete solution. GKC is available to natural persons who are resident in Germany for tax purposes. At the beginning, you will answer a few questions about your financial goals, your current financial situation, your knowledge and experience of the capital market and your attitude to risk. We then build a customized portfolio of several specific individual funds. This modular approach, usually consisting of more than ten individual funds, allows your specific circumstances and objectives to be mapped more individually. The initial process also includes opening a custody account, which is paperless, streamlined and quick.
The services offered by GKC include the appropriate ongoing product selection and ongoing rebalancing. With just a few clicks, you can adjust the various risk classes in the app (iOS or Android) or in the browser, make deposits or withdrawals and set up a savings plan or withdrawal plan. Transaction costs triggered by this are part of the all-in fee and are not charged additionally; custody account management costs are also included. You can also take a detailed look at your portfolio in the apps. Customer service is also available by e-mail and telephone.
No, the initial price of an ETF share is around €10 (subject to market fluctuations) and savings plans are possible from as little as €1, depending on the broker.
The Gerd Kommer ETF is available from most banks and online brokers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. To buy the Gerd Kommer ETF, you must have a securities account and enter the WKN “WELT0A” (or ISIN: IE0001UQQ933) in the search mask for the accumulating or “WELT0B” (or ISIN: IE000FPWSL69) for the distributing variant. In most cases, it should be enough to type in “Gerd Kommer”. The ETF is then stored in the securities account, similar to valuables in a safe deposit box.
Yes, the Gerd Kommer ETF is registered in the following countries in addition to Germany: Great Britain, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Austria, Luxembourg, Spain, Switzerland and Ireland. In some countries, a purchase is possible anyway, even if the ETF is not registered there. In principle, a product can also be purchased from other countries via the relevant stock exchange. Please consult your tax advisor regarding possible tax implications. A complete overview of all countries in which the Gerd Kommer ETF is registered can be found at the fund headquarters of L&G.
The Gerd Kommer ETF is available as a savings plan from most banks and brokers. You can find a presumably incomplete overview here, for example.
The bank or broker decides whether the ETF is offered as a savings plan. We only have limited influence on this. The greater the demand, the more likely it is that the ETF will also be eligible for savings plans at your institution. If it is not yet eligible for a savings plan there, please write directly to your bank.
No.
The L&G Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity UCITS ETF is available in both an accumulating version (WKN: WELT0A, ISIN: IE0001UQQ933) and a distributing version (WKN: WELT0B, ISIN: IE000FPWSL69). With the former, distributions (e.g. dividends) are automatically reinvested (accumulated), while with the latter, distributions are transferred quarterly directly to the investor’s clearing account belonging to the securities account. Distributions are made in March, June, September and December.
The benchmark of the L&G Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity UCITS ETF is the underlying Solactive Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity Index NTR (ISIN: DE000SL0G219).
When comparing ETFs with, for example, the MSCI World Index, the MSCI ACWI or the FTSE All-World Index, it should be noted that the L&G Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity UCITS ETF is based on a different investment strategy. The country weighting towards economic performance, factor investing or the 1% cap alone can lead to greater deviations in performance compared to the indices mentioned, particularly in the short and medium term.
We have set up a detailed ETF comparison page that focuses in particular on the differences between the Gerd Kommer ETF and its alternatives.
That depends.
The L&G Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity UCITS ETF was developed as a 1-ETF solution for the risky portfolio part of Gerd Kommer’s world portfolio concept or generally as a 1-ETF solution for a broadly diversified global equity investment. If you want to invest in the form of a return-oriented “100/0 level 1 asset allocation” (100% risky/0% low-risk), we do not believe you need another equity ETF in addition to the Gerd Kommer ETF.
If you want to be more conservative (safety-oriented) – e.g. with a level 1 asset allocation of “90/10”, “80/20”, “70/30” etc. up to “10/90” – you can consider either combining the Gerd Kommer ETF with a bond ETF or covering the low-risk part of the portfolio with interest-bearing overnight money at a bank. In our view, the bond ETF used should only cover short residual maturities of debtors with high credit ratings in the investor’s home currency. For risk reasons, the balance of the call deposit account should not exceed 100,000 euros, the upper limit of the state deposit guarantee in Germany.
More information on the low-risk portfolio section can be found in Gerd Kommer’s whitepaper.
L&G is a pioneer in the exercise of voting rights and the responsible use of capital. Voting rights are bundled across the entire active and passive business and spoken to a company with one voice. In particular, L&G believes that companies have a responsibility in the areas of climate change, remuneration policy, the independence and diversity of the Board of Directors and other topics.
Further information on topics such as investment stewardship, guidelines and guidelines, voting disclosures and active shareholder engagement can be found here.
The Gerd Kommer ETF is available as a savings plan from most banks and brokers. The bank or broker decides whether the ETF is offered as a savings plan, i.e. we have only limited influence on this. The greater the demand, the more likely it is that the ETF will also be eligible for savings plans at your institution. Please write directly to customer service so that your bank is aware of the request.
Yes, the ETF is available from most banks and brokers in Switzerland. If the ETF is not available from your provider, please contact them first and then inform the fund provider L&G at moc.migl@dnalhcstued of the reasons for the unavailability.
The company was listed on the SIX Swiss Exchange on August 15, 2023. The trading currency there is the CHF. Trading is also possible in euros via other exchanges (e.g. XETRA). The ETF is authorized for distribution in Switzerland and Swiss tax reporting (FTA reporting) is published.
Yes, the ETF is available in Austria from most banks and brokers. If the ETF is not available from your provider, please contact them first and then inform the fund provider L&G at moc.migl@dnalhcstued of the reasons for the unavailability.
The ETF is authorized for distribution in Austria and is a reporting fund.
No, the ETF is currently not available in the PEA and cannot be purchased via Euronext.
As is usual for all exchange-traded products, placing an order as a limit order with a specified maximum (for buys) or minimum (for sells) execution price can help to achieve the desired execution price. A trading venue with high liquidity or a comparison of offers in direct trading can also have an advantageous effect. We accept no liability for any losses arising from the independent placement of orders.
A detailed description of the investment approach underlying the Gerd Kommer ETF can be found on our features page and in Gerd Kommer’s whitepaper.
There are numerous blog posts and YouTube videos on many specific investment aspects that play a role in Gerd Kommer’s investment approach.
Dr. Gerd Kommer’s books explain and describe the investment approach in even greater detail.
If you want to understand the exact details of how the underlying index works, you should take a look at the index methodology.
An overview of various key figures can be found in the Quarterly Index Summary.
The Gerd Kommer ETF comprises just under 50 countries (compared with just over 20 for an MSCI World ETF). The weighting of an individual country in the index is determined 50% by its market capitalization and 50% by the country’s share of global gross domestic product (global economic performance). This mitigates the cluster risk of the USA, for example, which exists in the MSCI World Index (around 70% weighting for the USA as at mid-2025). In turn, emerging markets and the majority of non-US developed countries are weighted higher.
This video on our YouTube channel takes a closer look at the differences in regional weightings and this blog post looks at investing in emerging markets.
The Quarterly Index Summary provides a comparison of the weightings of individual countries.
The trading currency of the Gerd Kommer ETF on German stock exchanges is usually the euro. The trading currency on the SIX Swiss Exchange is the Swiss franc.
In the blog post “Currency hedging: When does it make sense, when not?” by Gerd Kommer provides more detailed information on the economic significance of the so-called “fund currency” and generally on the issue of exchange rate risk or its hedging in an investor’s portfolio.
The USD is the fund currency (also known as the reporting currency) of the ETF. This is common for funds that invest internationally. The trading currency of the Gerd Kommer ETF on German stock exchanges is usually the euro. The trading currency on the SIX Swiss Exchange is the Swiss franc. The trading currency is the currency you need to buy the shares in your account.
The concept of the “reporting currency” of a portfolio – in the case of funds, the so-called fund currency – has no relevance per se for the exchange rate risk of an investor in this portfolio or fund. This aspect of currency risk is often misunderstood by financial journalists and private investors, and occasionally even by professionals. Let’s look at the example of an ETF on the MSCI World Standard Index. These kinds of ETFs are offered in Germany in both the fund currency, the dollar, and the fund currency, the euro. The exchange rate risk for a German private investor whose home currency is the euro is exactly the same for such an ETF with the reporting currency euro as for an ETF with the reporting currency dollar. The reporting currency is an arbitrarily chosen unit of account for expressing an economic substance that is fundamentally independent of it. Assume that the MSCI World Index returns 5% in USD in a given calendar year. In the same year, the EUR appreciates by 5% against the USD. Investor Franz and investor Sissi, who live in Vienna (their functional currency is the euro), have invested in two MSCI World ETFs. Franz (he owns ETF A) has the fund currency USD and Sissi (she owns ETF B) EUR. How does this difference affect the returns realized by Franz and Sissi? For ETF A, the “reported” return (the fund return) would be 5%, i.e. the return in USD. However, Franz and Sissi both calculate in euros – at the end of the day, this is the only return that matters to them. Franz’s Austrian custodian bank “kindly” converts the USD return of ETF A into euros in the monthly securities account report and in euros it is 0%. In the case of the otherwise identical ETF B from Sissi with the fund currency euro, the reported return is 0% from the outset because the asset management company has already carried out the conversion. The result is therefore identical. Ergo: The reporting currency of a fund is of no economic significance. For the real currency risk in a given functional currency, the only thing that matters is the economic substance, which is of course identical in both ETFs – after all, they replicate the same index. The fact that several funds are offered for one and the same index, which have different reporting currencies, is an irrelevant marketing gimmick that suggests to investors a non-existent difference in risk.
Unlike an MSCI World ETF, the Gerd Kommer ETF also includes emerging market stocks in the regional dimension and small caps in the size dimension. The ETF can therefore be described as an “All Cap ETF”, which basically tracks the entire world stock market. The MSCI World, on the other hand, does not include emerging market equities and small caps.
Gerd Kommer attaches great importance to the highest possible level of diversification as a risk reduction technique. The Solactive Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity Index NTR therefore contains around 5,000 stocks. The maximum weighting of an individual stock in the index is limited to a maximum of one percent (per stock) on each adjustment date, so that there can be no “top-heaviness” (i.e. a proportion of the ten largest stocks of over 10% as in many other global equity ETFs). The individual value risk is thus effectively completely diversified away. The unique GDP country weighting also means that the Gerd Kommer ETF is more evenly diversified across countries. We call the high number of stocks in combination with the avoidance of a concentration in a few stocks, sectors or countries ultra-diversification.
When the ETF was launched, around 2,000 individual securities were selected for the ETF portfolio from the approximately 5,000 stocks in the index using an optimized sampling procedure. As the fund volume in the ETF increased over time, this figure was further increased. As of mid-2025, over 4,000 individual securities are already included. This figure may rise further with inflows. The aim of portfolio management in the ETF is to track the index as closely as possible while keeping transaction costs low for investors.
You can find more information on the benefits of diversification in Gerd Kommer’s whitepaper.
In principle, we see the following concentration risks, which we aim to mitigate through the construction of the index: At country level, at sector level and at individual share level.
Countries
The weighting in the ETF is based on individual countries, not regions. Possible concentrations within regions are also taken into account. What would the example of Japan have looked like? As of 2021, both the proportionate market capitalization and the proportionate GDP were around 6% (sources: MSCI, Worldbank). On November 1, 2023, the index weighting in the Gerd Kommer Index was 5.7% compared to 6.2% in the world stock market. You can view the values in the Quarterly Index Summary. In 1989, by contrast, Japan’s market capitalization was around 40% and GDP around 15% (source: Dimson, Marsh & Staunton). A pro rata GDP weighting would have meant that the weighting in the Gerd Kommer Index would have been in the region of 28% at the time, rather than 40%. The exact procedure can be found in the Index Guideline. It is presented in a simplified form in this video. All adjustments are made through transactions within the index or ETF. In the event of implementation with adjustments/rebalancing on your own initiative, taxes can be triggered on sales. This blog post may be of interest in this context.
Sectors
The basic aim is to limit sector deviations from the parent index. As a rule, there are deviations of up to three or five percentage points per sector. These deviations are primarily due to factor investing. It is therefore to be expected that the sectors that are more strongly represented in the small cap sector (size) and are currently valued relatively more favorably (value) and are more profitable (quality) will be weighted more heavily. Momentum and investment can also play a role in the short term. In the medium and long term, it can be assumed that factor investing will lead to a lower weighting of expensive and unprofitable sectors by taking the value and quality premium into account. When bubbles occur, this usually applies to the stocks concerned: A high valuation that is no longer in proportion to profitability. Current sector weightings can also be found in the Quarterly Index Summary. As you can see there, more expensive sectors such as Information Technology are currently weighted lower and cheaper sectors such as Energy are weighted higher.
Individual securities
Another concentration factor can be a high exposure to individual stocks. In the Gerd Kommer Index, each stock is limited to 1% on the quarterly adjustment date in order to avoid excessive exposure to individual stocks. An overview of the holdings concentration can also be found in the Quarterly Index Summary.
Yes, the Gerd Kommer ETF is a physically replicating ETF (“optimized sampling”), i.e. not a swap ETF (synthetic ETF). This ensures that the underlying index is faithfully reproduced and that there is no counterparty risk.
“Sampling” refers to the drawing of random samples. “Optimized sampling” in turn refers to a representative and sufficiently large subset (sample) of the population (i.e. all of the approximately 5,000 stocks in the Solactive Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity Index NTR). The deviations relative to the index shown (tracking difference) are small due to the statistical methods used. In addition, optimized sampling helps to keep transaction costs in the ETF as low as possible, which should benefit all investors in the ETF.
No, the investment approach underlying the ETF is commonly referred to as “passive investing”. It is based on a long-term, forecast-free, disciplined, rule-based buy-and-hold philosophy with the broadest possible diversification (buy-and-hold especially from the end investor’s point of view). However, some people refer to factor investing as “active investing”. We think that’s nonsense. In general, the distinction between passive and active investing can degenerate into useless quibbling.
In any case, our investment approach avoids the use of forecasts. It is therefore forecast-free and in this sense non-speculative investing. We also focus on very broad diversification (“ultra-diversification”). Stocks in the index (and thus in the ETF) are not exchanged on the basis of forecasts and speculation, but when the underlying index definition derived from science requires it. From an end investor’s perspective, we recommend buy and hold combined with mechanical rebalancing.
Active investing is necessarily based on the use of forecasts, e.g. of future security prices, industry growth or macroeconomic variables such as interest rates or inflation. This is counterproductive because, as we know from scientific studies, such forecasts turn out to be wrong in around half of all cases. However, following such forecasts as part of an investment strategy always results in high transaction costs (costs for buying and selling securities). This makes following forecasts detrimental to returns overall, whereas with buy and hold these costs only arise to a much lesser extent. Frequent trading can also have tax disadvantages.
Gerd Kommer has summarized why “active investing” should be rejected in a blog post entitled “Ten reasons why active investing works badly“.
A detailed description of our investment approach can be found in Gerd Kommer’s whitepaper. The books by Dr. Gerd Kommer justify and describe the approach in more detail.
No, that is not the case. There are several criteria (one could also say rules) for the inclusion and weighting of stocks in the index that the ETF tracks than would be the case with a simple MSCI World ETF. However, this does not mean that the Gerd Kommer ETF is very complex. In reality, there are only about a dozen ultimately simple criteria that determine how the stocks are weighted in the index (and thus in the ETF). If you compare this to an actively managed fund, the Gerd Kommer ETF is very simple. Actively managed funds use a much larger number of criteria for selecting securities, most of which are opinion-driven and constantly changing. In general, we have adopted Einstein’s motto in the construction of our ETF: “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler”.
Since the 1960s, literally thousands of scientific studies have been published showing that passive investment management is superior to active investment management in terms of returns.
Gerd Kommer has written a detailed blog post titled “Ten reasons why active investing works poorly” that summarizes why we dislike active investing.
A detailed description of the investment approach underlying the Gerd Kommer ETF can be found on our features page and in Gerd Kommer’s whitepaper.
The short answer: nothing.
The somewhat longer answer: A stock market crash generally occurs when the stock market in question falls by more than around 25% from its last high. In cases of strong downward movements (slumps) like this in the market, you should simply do “nothing”. This means that you should neither sell securities nor delay planned purchases simply because of the downward movements. A large number of scientific studies from the past decades have shown that this buy and hold approach is superior to active investment approaches in terms of return and risk.
Gerd Kommer has published some key thoughts on the topic of “What to do in a stock crash?” using the specific example of the corona crash (which began in mid-February 2020) in a blog post entitled “The corona crash: What to do?” summarized.
For investors in the first half of their lives (“young investors”), a stock market crash can even have a wealth-increasing effect. We explained why this is the case in a blog post entitled “Why young investors should pray for the crash“.
Yes, the Gerd Kommer ETF is an Article 8 fund as defined by the Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) of the European Commission. Because it is based on minimum standards and is not a primary sustainability fund, it does not have ESG in its name. (“ESG” stands for Environmental, Social, Governance in the context of sustainability criteria)
The Solactive Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity Index NTR underlying the Gerd Kommer ETF includes a CO2 filter (screen). For this purpose, the top 3 percent of companies in eleven key industries with the highest greenhouse gas intensity are excluded. This is measured in greenhouse gases (Scope 1 [direct] and Scope 2 [indirect]) in relation to the enterprise value (EVIC).
Furthermore, companies are excluded if they do not meet the minimum standards of globally recognized business practices. These include violations of United Nations regulations, the most serious sustainability violations (“Severe ESG Controversies”), the production of controversial weapons and coal producers.
The ETF thus takes into account key sustainability aspects on which there is most likely to be consensus, but does not go as far as most sustainable funds in order to avoid the necessary sacrifices in diversification or expected returns. For example, the defense industry or energy companies are not excluded across the board.
The ESG exclusion criteria are explained in more detail in the index methodology.
The focus on minimum standards excludes a small number of companies. As of mid-2025, around 285 stocks are excluded from the parent index’s starting universe of around 10,000 on ESG grounds. Shifts in the weightings of the individual key industries are avoided, as the CO2 filter is applied within these. Minor shifts due to the exclusion of companies that do not meet the minimum standards of globally recognized business practices are corrected in order to keep the relevant sector weighting neutral.
The effect of ESG exclusions on diversification, risk and return is likely to be low to non-measurable due to the approach described above. At individual stock level, the excluded companies tend to have higher risks, for example due to reputational risks. The fundamental adjustment of weightings on the basis of factor exposure avoids an unfavorable factor bias (an unintentionally disadvantageous factor characteristic of sustainable funds). Factor investing aims to increase the expected return; the effect of ESG should be minimized.
No, because gold and other precious metals do not represent a sufficiently attractive asset class in terms of their respective long-term historical risk-return profile from a scientific and therefore also our point of view.
Gerd Kommer has written a blog post on this subject entitled “Gold as an investment – do you need it?“.
However, stocks of precious metal producers (mining companies) and luxury goods companies that sell gold jewelry, among other things, are part of the world stock market and are therefore also included in the Gerd Kommer ETF.
No, because in terms of their long-term historical risk-return profile, commodities are not a sufficiently attractive asset class from a scientific and therefore also our point of view.
With the exception of precious metals, investing in physical commodities (e.g. energy commodities, agricultural commodities, base metals or minerals) is not even realistically possible for private investors. This may not be clear to some private investors. Due to the high ancillary costs of purchasing, storage and insurance, commodity investments are in fact only possible for investors via so-called commodity futures. These also exist in ETF form (more precisely: ETC form). Commodity futures are so-called derivatives, i.e. “derived” securities. The return and risk of commodity futures differ greatly from the underlying physical commodity market (“spot market”).
Gerd Kommer has written a blog post on this subject entitled “Commodity investments – do they make sense?“.
Yes, because the real estate sector is part of the world stock market, just like chemicals, information technology, healthcare, mechanical engineering, transportation, finance, media or utilities, for example. Take Germany’s largest real estate company, the listed Vonovia SE based in Düsseldorf, for example. The company owns around 480,000 rented apartments throughout Germany. Accordingly, the Gerd Kommer ETF invests in real estate via real estate shares.
No, the Gerd Kommer ETF is a pure equity ETF.
No, because there are scientific studies that suggest that companies underperform on average after their IPO (initial public offering), as they are often priced higher in the months following the IPO. They can therefore be included in the index and thus the Gerd Kommer ETF at the earliest twelve months after their IPO. This should increase the expected return in the long term.
Gerd Kommer has written a blog post on this subject entitled “Investing in IPOs – a loser’s bet“.
No, because stocks that are particularly heavily leveraged are subject to downward price pressure.
Stocks that are lent out at a certain point in time via securities lending are usually also stocks that are particularly speculated to fall in price, as the borrowers are typically hedge funds that “short selling” the stock in question in order to profit from a fall in price. Academic research suggests that from a buyer’s perspective, these kinds of stocks have below-market returns for a short period of time. Historical examples include GameStop and Wirecard, both of which had extremely high securities lending ratios at times for different reasons. In the underlying index, around 0.5% of all stocks are excluded based on their relative loan-to-value ratio.
Gerd Kommer has written a blog post about this entitled “GameStop effect: Is it wise to bet against short sellers?“.
No, it is a pure equity ETF.
No, there is no currency hedging in the Gerd Kommer ETF. In the blog post “Currency hedging: When does it make sense, when not?” by Gerd Kommer provides more detailed information on exchange rate risk and how to hedge it in an investor’s portfolio.
The trading currency of the Gerd Kommer ETF on German stock exchanges is usually the euro. The trading currency on the SIX Swiss Exchange is the Swiss franc.
Disclaimer: Pay attention to the currency risk. You can receive payments in different currencies, so the final return depends on the exchange rate between the currencies.
The country weightings of the underlying index are listed in the Quarterly Index Summary.
The sector weightings of the underlying index are listed in the Quarterly Index Summary.
Distributions are made quarterly in March, June, September and December along with those of most other distributing equity ETFs.
The distributions are based on the dividend payments of the companies included in the ETF. These are not known for the future, which is why no reliable information can be provided.
On average, companies with a positive (desirable) value and quality factor premium tend to pay higher dividends in the long term. In the case of the Size, Investment and Momentum premiums, this relationship is variable and fluctuates over time.
The current dividend yield can be found in the Quarterly Index Summary under “Fundamentals”.
The historical dividends of the index can be derived from the index return differences between the net total return and price return index. Future distributions may deviate from this. The following table provides an overview of the historical “Net Dividend Yield”:
2018 2.1%
2019 2.2%
2020 2.0%
2021 1.8%
2022 2.3%
2023 2.4%
2024. 2.3%
The following points should be taken into account when extrapolating from the distributions made by the ETF since its launch:
The Gerd Kommer ETF was launched in mid-2023. Since then, the performance can be viewed on all relevant ETF portals. By definition, there is no data for the ETF going back further in time.
The underlying index started on 31.07.2017. This is the longest period over which reliable data points are available for the entire index universe. If you look at the individual factors in the scientific literature, the data goes back further, which was taken into account in the index construction.
As with most World ETFs, the index is denominated in US dollars and not in euros. When making a comparison, attention must be paid to the correct choice of currency and the correct NTR (“net total return”) variant of the index, i.e. the index taking into account dividends after flat-rate tax deduction.
There are around 10,000 stocks in the Prime Listing Standard segments of all the world’s stock exchanges. In theory, it would be desirable to invest in all 10,000 stocks. In practice, however, transaction costs must be taken into account. The index was therefore constructed in such a way that all stocks included in it could be tracked at a reasonable cost. Around half of the 10,000 stocks are therefore not included in the index. These are the smallest of the small stocks (smallest small caps and micro caps). Although these are large in number, they only represent around 2-3% of the total market value of the 10,000 stocks. Buying these stocks physically would incur high transaction costs due to their number and low liquidity. The missing weighting is redistributed (reallocated) among the other small caps in the index so that the natural small cap weighting at the beginning of the index optimization is maintained. Overall, smaller stocks are overweighted by taking the size factor into account in the optimization. There are also exclusions due to ESG, IPOs and securities lending, but these represent only a small number of the exclusions.
The maximum weighting of an individual stock in the index is limited to a maximum value of one percent (per stock) on each adjustment date, so that there can be no “top-heaviness” (i.e. a proportion of the ten largest stocks of over 10%, as exists in many other global equity ETFs). The weightings can fluctuate freely between the quarterly adjustment dates (rebalancing dates). This is common for passive ETFs and the effect would be more pronounced for semi-annually adjusted ETFs than for the Gerd Kommer ETF.
We have always kept asset turnover in mind when developing our investment strategy. One of the reasons why the momentum and investment factors were designed as a screen in the investment strategy is to reduce portfolio turnover. The one-way turnover of the underlying index averaged around 30% per year from the launch of the index to the launch of the ETF. The values may fluctuate and may be higher or lower in the future.
Factor investing – often also called Smart-Beta Investing – involves overweighting so-called factor premiums compared to a market capitalization-weighted index. In a “normal” security index (e.g. the DAX or the MSCI World), the individual stocks are weighted according to the principle of market capitalization. This means that the weighting of an individual stock corporation in the index, be it Apple or BMW, is determined by its market capitalization (also known as stock market value). Market capitalization is the market value of a company’s equity (or, to put it simply, its enterprise value).
With factor investing, it is no longer market capitalization alone that determines the weighting of a company in the index, but also other “factors”, i.e. “factor premiums”. One example: The value factor(“value”) expresses whether a stock is reasonably priced relative to certain economic variables such as profit or book equity.
Factor premiums are statistically identifiable drivers of return and risk in an asset class (here in the asset class of stocks). They explain a large part of the risk-return profile of a diversified portfolio. Overweighting factor premiums in a portfolio relative to a “market neutral” portfolio (the total market) can increase its expected return relative to an appropriate market neutral benchmark. Gerd Kommer has written a blog post on this subject entitled “Factor investing – the basics“.
The Gerd Kommer ETF overweights the size, value and quality factor premiums as part of an optimization in the equity segment. The investment and momentum premiums are also taken into account via a downstream filter (see next question for more details on the individual factor premiums).
Compared to a “market-neutral” portfolio weighted purely by market capitalization, the Gerd Kommer ETF also overweights emerging markets. Some academics also see the historical excess return of emerging market stocks over comparable stocks from developed countries as a kind of factor premium – the political risk premium.
The following factor premiums are taken into account in the Gerd Kommer ETF:
The Gerd Kommer ETF can be described as integrated multi-factor investing, as the factor premiums taken into account are reflected in a single index instead of several individual indices. In this way, theoretically possible negative interactions between individual factor premiums are reduced. It also exploits the fact that certain factor premiums have a stronger effect in combination with others than “stand-alone”. This applies, for example, to Size and Value or Size and Quality.
For broad diversification, the factor premiums Size, Value and Quality are achieved by adjusting the respective weightings of the stocks. This is done as part of the quarterly rebalancing, in which the three factors are equally weighted.
With regard to the Momentum and Investment premiums, we use a special screening technique to keep the securities turnover associated with the use of these two premiums and the resulting transaction costs low.
The political risk premium results from the adjustment of the country weightings in the direction of GDP (gross domestic product) even before optimization, i.e. as part of the country weighting.
Further mechanical details can be found in the index methodology.
No, factor investing can also lead to lower returns over several years than “market-neutral” investing, i.e. passive investing without taking factor premiums into account.
The expected performance advantage of factor investing over market-neutral passive investing is all the more likely the longer the period under review. Factor investing can also yield lower returns over periods of five or ten years than market-neutral investing. However, you should bear in mind that the stock market is generally only statistically more profitable than a savings account in the long term. Over the last hundred years, in every country for which such financial market data is available, there have been phases of up to ten years in which the national stock market returned less than a “savings account” or overnight money. In the long term, however, the stock market produced a much higher return.
Gerd Kommer has published a blog post on this subject entitled “The Pains of Factor Investing“.
The Quarterly Index Summary lists the factor uplifts (increases in the fundamental values of the factors) of the underlying index.
No, the “High Dividend Yield” factor premium is not directly taken into account in the Gerd Kommer ETF.
The overarching goal of index construction is to maximize the expected return while ensuring ultra-diversification. Therefore, only those factor premiums that are expected to increase the expected return are taken into account.
Research has often shown that dividend yields per se have no systematic influence on total return. Possible outperformance is mainly attributed to the overlap with other factor premiums (especially value and quality). On average, companies with a positive (desirable) value and quality factor premium tend to pay higher dividends in the long term. In the case of the Size, Investment and Momentum premiums, this relationship is variable and fluctuates over time.
In this context, you may find our blog post “Dividend strategies: Facts and fantasies” may be of interest to you.
No, the minimum volatility premium (also known as the low-volatility premium) is not taken into account in the Gerd Kommer ETF.
The overarching goal of index construction is to maximize the expected return while ensuring ultra-diversification. Therefore, only those factor premiums that are expected to increase the expected return are taken into account.
Although minimum volatility can lead to higher risk-adjusted returns in the expected value over the long term, it does not necessarily lead to higher absolute returns, which must be maximized. Most academic studies suggest that the historically higher returns are due to the overlap with the other factor premiums (especially value, quality and investment) and that these are probably the cause of the performance.
This is integrated multifactor investing with regard to the factor premiums of size, value and quality. The investment and momentum factors are taken into account downstream as so-called screens in order to keep the turnover (share turnover) as low as possible, as these key figures tend to change more quickly than the other factors.
In the construction of the underlying index, conscious attention was paid to interactions between factor premiums. The size, value and quality factors, which tend to reinforce each other, are therefore considered simultaneously in the optimization process. Stocks that have a particularly positive factor score in all three categories, for example, therefore tend to have their weighting increased more than other stocks and vice versa. You can find more information on integrated multifactor investing in our blog post “Integrated multifactor investing“.
The investment and momentum factors are taken into account downstream as so-called screens in order to keep the turnover (share turnover) low, as these key figures tend to change more quickly than the other factors.
Exclusions such as those due to ESG, IPOs or securities lending are already taken into account before optimization, so that no distortions arise as a result.
Yes, in the underlying index the optimization is run for each country individually.
We reject any form of “market timing” – the attempt to “circumnavigate” “bad” market phases – because it does not work reliably enough and can be detrimental to returns in the long term. This rejection therefore includes valuation-driven market timing. We believe that it makes sense to invest immediately whenever you receive money that you do not need in the long term and that you want to invest in principle.
In this context, the blog post“Overvaluation of the stock market – what to do?” by Gerd Kommer may be of interest to you. Among other things, this blog post clarifies that many statements published in the popular media about supposedly overvalued or “hot” markets are technical misunderstandings and confusion. It also explains that even a very highly valued stock market still has a higher expected return than overnight money at banks or a savings account, for example.
Market timing in relation to the entry point works just as badly as market timing in general. Gerd Kommer has written a detailed blog post on this subject entitled “Timing market entry – does it work?“.
On a statistical average, with regard to the stock market, an immediate entry with the entire investment amount earmarked for the investment in one amount is more profitable than a stretched entry in partial amounts over e.g. twelve or 36 months.
For psychological reasons, however, a stretched entry may make sense for some private investors. Gerd Kommer has written a blog post on this question entitled “Getting into the stock market: Lump-sum investment or phase investment?” written.
However, Gerd Kommer generally recommends risk management not via the timing of entry into the stock market, but via a sufficiently conservative “level 1 asset allocation” (the division of the portfolio into a risky and a low-risk component).
If you are currently worried about whether now is the right time to enter the market, you can start with a deliberately conservative (low-risk) Level 1 asset allocation and then, as soon as these worries diminish, “switch up” to a more ambitious Level 1 asset allocation possible within your maximum risk category (i.e. a Level 1 asset allocation with a higher proportion of the risky portfolio component).
The following applies to an investor with loan liabilities: If the investor does not invest exclusively in the risky part of the portfolio (i.e. has a 100/0 level 1 asset allocation), he usually enters into a so-called “negative interest rate differential transaction”. There is no general answer as to whether an investment makes sense in this constellation.
Gerd Kommer has written a blog post entitled “Negative interest rate differential transactions – harmful and unnecessary” and published the YouTube video “Financing owner-occupied property and investing in ETFs – does that make sense?”.
On the one hand, the global market share of “passive investing” – if measured correctly – is much lower than is often misleadingly publicized in the media. On the other hand, ETFs have passed several stress tests of their legal structure in recent decades with the bursting of the dot-com bubble, the Great Financial Crisis and the coronavirus crisis without any problems.
Gerd Kommer has published a blog post on this subject entitled “The legend of the high market share of passive investing” and, in connection with “Criticism of ETFs”, another blog post entitled “The absurd demonization of ETFs“.
The L&G Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity UCITS ETF (“Gerd Kommer ETF”) is legally a so-called UCITS fund, i.e. a retail fund, and is therefore subject to EU UCITS fund legislation and regulation. The investor assets in the ETF represent so-called special assets. Should an ETF provider become insolvent, the assets managed by the ETF provider are protected from access by the ETF provider’s creditors and are completely segregated due to their status as special assets. Only the holders of unit certificates of the Gerd Kommer ETF are entitled to their pro rata share of the assets managed by the ETF.
Neither Gerd Kommer Invest GmbH (“GKI”) nor Legal & General Investment Management Limited (“L&G”) or Solactive AG (“Solactive”) are authorized to obtain possession or ownership of the client’s assets. The client’s assets are held in custody by the custodian bank. In the event of the insolvency of GKI, L&G or Solactive, the customer assets contained in the securities account shall not be included in the relevant insolvency estate. Insolvency would therefore not affect the asset positions of the investors (customers).
In the event of the custodian bank’s insolvency, investors (customers) have a claim to the surrender of the securities in their portfolio. Here, too, the securities are not included in the custodian bank’s bankruptcy estate. The custodian bank merely acts as a depositary for the securities.
The money invested in the Gerd Kommer ETF is therefore protected in the best possible way against any insolvency of all parties involved due to the strict UCITS regulation.
The Gerd Kommer ETF is an index fund, i.e. it tracks the underlying index, the Solactive Gerd Kommer Multifactor Equity Index NTR, purely mechanically. The index was initially developed by Gerd Kommer Invest together with L&G and Solactive and launched by Solactive. It is recalculated on an ongoing basis using the defined rules. However, no further action is required on the part of Gerd Kommer Invest or Dr. Gerd Kommer. This means that the Gerd Kommer ETF would continue to exist with the established investment strategy in the event of Dr. Gerd Kommer’s death.
Irrespective of this, Dr. Gerd Kommer is committed to a healthy lifestyle and intends to pursue his passion for passive investing for many years to come.
The costs of the ETF (“TER”) amount to 0.50% per year, are already included in the reported return of the ETF and are thus directly offset against the performance, i.e. they automatically reduce the taxable profit.
There are several reasons for this, which primarily stem from the fact that the Gerd Kommer ETF cannot be directly compared with ETFs on the MSCI World, for example, as the Gerd Kommer ETF offers significantly more features and is more complex, as we will briefly explain below.
Investing in emerging markets generally leads to higher costs at fund level. Due to its proportional GDP weighting, the Gerd Kommer ETF has a higher weighting in emerging markets compared to ETFs that only take emerging markets into account within the scope of their market capitalization or not at all.
The inclusion of small caps leads to higher effort in portfolio management and index calculation, as the number of securities in the underlying optimization increases sharply. To our knowledge, the Gerd Kommer ETF is currently (as of mid-2025) the only multi-factor ETF in Germany that includes emerging markets and small caps, which we consider important as other factor premiums have a stronger impact in the small-cap segment. This means, for example, that small value stocks have a higher expected return than small cap and value stocks on their own.
The consideration of factor premiums causes higher costs at conceptual, index-related and portfolio management level.
Significantly more data points (factors, GDP weightings, ESG, securities lending) are required for the index calculation than for a market capitalization-weighted index.
The costs of the Gerd Kommer ETF are comparable to other multi-factor ETFs or portfolio funds and drastically lower than those of conventional active funds. Taking into account the points listed above and the fact that the Gerd Kommer ETF is the only ETF authorized in Germany that takes into account not only market capitalization but also the economic performance of a country in its regional weighting, we are convinced that it offers fair pricing.
A comparison with other “World AG” and multi-factor ETFs as well as active funds can be found here.
We are convinced that the Gerd Kommer ETF is currently fairly priced compared to ETFs on standard indices, taking into account the additional features, including in the area of risk diversification. If we see scope to reduce the TER in the future, we will take advantage of it, as part of our mission is to make capital investment accessible to private investors at low cost. We are currently unable to estimate whether and when this will be the case.
No.
No, the Gerd Kommer ETF does not charge performance fees, firstly, performance fees almost inevitably cause harmful conflicts of interest for the asset management company and, secondly, they do not increase the long-term return for customers – as is often claimed – but reduce it. In our view, performance fees are quite simply unfair. Gerd Kommer has written a blog post on this subject entitled “Performance fees – appearance and reality“.
We aim to proactively manage and limit portfolio transaction costs for the ETF. For example, we use optimization methods to limit portfolio turnover and thereby reduce taxes and duties such as stamp duties, regulatory levies and stock exchange fees wherever possible.
We already paid attention to portfolio transaction costs when developing the investment strategy. One of the reasons why the momentum and investment factors were designed as a screen in the investment strategy is to reduce portfolio turnover. The one-way turnover of the underlying index averaged around 30% per year from the launch of the index to the launch of the ETF. The values may fluctuate and may be higher or lower in the future.
The portfolio transaction costs for the ETF can be found in the European MiFID template (EMT), which is available on the website of L&G under the section “Literature” > “Legal Documents” > Excel-File “MiFID II EMT Costs and Charges”. In the EMT, you must filter by the relevant ISIN (IE0001UQQ933 for the accumulating asset class and IE000FPWSL69 for the distributing asset class). The transaction costs are listed there under “Financial Instrument Transaction Costs Ex Post”. The EMT is updated every six months and is usually published in April/October.
Please note that the portfolio transaction costs shown in the EMT follow a predefined methodology of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), where the portfolio transaction costs are composed of the custody costs, the explicit portfolio transaction costs and the implicit costs (i.e. the market impact on the trading activities of the fund). In certain constellations, “0” may be shown as the value. If you would like to find out more about the underlying calculation, please visit the ESMA website.
A possible order of magnitude for the costs of custody, implicit and explicit transaction costs (deviating from the EMT definition) could be around 0.1% p. a. As the fund volume continues to rise, it could fall further below this value. We would like to point out that this is a non-binding order of magnitude and that the actual costs may differ.
Invest in Gerd Kommer’s ETF in just three simple steps and from just €10.
Invest in Gerd Kommer’s ETF in just three simple steps and from just €10.
