Skip to main content
Welcome to
super saver spring
offer ends april 20
save over $140
save over 85%
per week for 24 weeks
Welcome to
super saver spring
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Spring wheat is harvested on a farm near Beausejour, Man., on Aug. 20, 2020.


Investing in companies involved in food and its production appears to be a winning strategy, on the surface. And exchange-traded funds may seem like a low-cost, diversified way to benefit from a growing population on a planet with finite resources.

Yet the notion that rising demand and limited supply will lead to higher prices for funds that invest in agri-businesses and soft commodities such as corn and wheat hasn’t borne fruit.

In fact, ETF investing in this sector has been a losing or, at best, a lacklustre proposition. The world’s largest soft commodity ETF, for example, Invesco’s DB Agriculture Fund (DBA-A) has seen an annualized loss of 6 per cent over the past decade.

Story continues below advertisement

Agri-business ETFs have fared better. The most widely traded, the VanEck Vectors Agribusiness ETF (MOO-A), has seen an annualized return of about 5 per cent over the past decade. However, that’s still less than the S&P 500′s average annualized return of about 13 per cent over the same period.

“The one positive the sector has is that it’s been beaten up so long … it may have room to run,” says Eric Balchunas, senior ETF analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence in New York and author of The Institutional ETF Toolbox.

Still, investors seeking a contrarian bet on agriculture don’t have many ETF options, Mr. Balchunas adds.

Below are the only four ETFs offering exposure to agriculture companies and one with direct exposure to the commodities many of these firms produce.

VanEck Vectors Agribusiness ETF (MOO-A)

Management expense ratio (MER): 0.56 per cent

Assets under management (AUM): US$623-million

Year-to-date (YTD) return: 0.73 per cent (all data from Morningstar as of Oct. 26 market close)

Story continues below advertisement

The largest ETF in the sector, MOO offers exposure to “a fairly wide array” of farm-equipment manufacturers, chemical makers (i.e. fertilizers and pesticides), seed producers and even pharmaceutical firms producing medicine for livestock, says David Kletz, vice-president and portfolio manager at Forstrong Global Asset Management in Toronto.

The problem with MOO is “it can be more challenging to get a firm grasp on the varying economic drivers that influence returns” because the holdings are involved in other sectors such as health care and industrials, he adds.

More than half of MOO’s geographical exposure is to the United States, with Canada, Germany and Japan accounting for about another 25 per cent.

Todd Rosenbluth, head of ETF research with CFRA Research in New York, points out the ETF’s top holdings, including Deere & Co. and Tyson Foods Inc., make MOO attractive in the year ahead as food demand should rebound as economies recover from COVID-19.

“The fund is likely to outperform the global equity category without taking on much risk,” he says.

Still, Mr. Rosenbluth says MOO is “narrowly focused” and could underperform diversified indices, such as the S&P 500, as it has for the last decade.

Story continues below advertisement

iShares MSCI Global Agriculture Producers ETF (VEGI-A)

MER: 0.39 per cent

AUM: US$29.5-million

YTD return: 3.3 per cent

An alternative to MOO, VEGI is the second-largest equity-focused ETF in the sector. It has higher weightings to consumer staples, industrials and materials companies than MOO, without the health care exposure, Mr. Rosenbluth says.

That’s translated into a five-year annualized performance of about 7 per cent (it launched in 2012), compared with MOO at about 9 per cent.

Its international exposure may explain some of the difference, with slightly larger allocations to Norway and China and little German exposure, he adds.

Story continues below advertisement

VEGI also holds 136 companies versus MOO’s 52. Like MOO, Mr. Rosenbluth says he believes “the fund is positioned to outperform.”

However, he says VEGI is more concentrated by sector than MOO, potentially making it a bit riskier.

Yet both have similar U.S. exposure of about 55 per cent, so even if its international stocks go “on a fabulous run versus the U.S, it probably would be a moot point,” Mr. Balchunas of Bloomberg says.

First Trust Indxx Global Agriculture ETF (FTAG)

MER: 0.7 per cent

AUM: US$3.1-million

YTD loss: 5 per cent

Story continues below advertisement

FTAG is the smallest of the agriculture equity ETFs. Unlike its peers, it doesn’t use capitalization weighting to select holdings.

“It uses fundamentals [screen] to pick the stocks, sort of like an active manager would,” Mr. Balchunas says.

Unfortunately, the strategy hasn’t been profitable. FTAG has seen a 5-year annualized loss of 5 per cent and an annualized 10-year loss of about 16 per cent.

One reason for its underperformance compared with MOO and VEGI is that it only has about 25 per cent of assets invested in U.S. companies, Mr. Balchunas says.

Another concern for investors is FTAG’s low AUM, leading to wider bid/ask spreads, he adds.

FTAG’s small size also puts it at risk of closing, joining other ETFs that recently ceased trading, including the Global X Fertilizers/Potash ETF (SOIL-A), which closed in August, and the Defiance Next Gen Food & Agriculture ETF (DIET-A), which launched last November and closed in May.

Story continues below advertisement

iShares Global Agriculture Index ETF (COW-T)

MER: 0.71 per cent

AUM: $254-million

YTD loss: 3.7 per cent

COW is the only Canadian-listed agriculture ETF. It seeks to replicate the performance of the Manulife Global Asset Agriculture Index, net of expenses, according to provider BlackRock.

It offers similar exposure to the VEGI and MOO, only with fewer holdings: 35 stocks.

Canadian exposure in the ETF is similar to its U.S.-listed counterpart MOO, but COW’s U.S. exposure is far higher at more than 80 per cent.

Forstrong’s Mr. Kletz says COW may appeal to Canadian investors seeking to “avoid foreign-exchange conversion costs.”

And while more expensive than VEGI and MOO, its 10-year annualized performance of about 8 per cent makes it the sector’s top long-term performer.

Invesco DB Agriculture Fund (DBA-A)

MER: 0.85 per cent

AUM: US$553-million

YTD loss: 10 per cent

Several ETFs track soft-commodities futures, including many following single commodities such as wheat. DBA, however, tracks the collective performance of several widely traded commodities such as corn, cotton, sugar and soybeans.

“The upside is you are holding a basket of these … so at least you’re diversifying your risk,” Mr. Balchunas of Bloomberg says.

The challenge, like all ETFs tracking futures, is DBA often suffers from selling expiring contracts at a low price and buying new contracts at a higher price. This often results in “a slow corrosion of returns” over long periods, he says.

That said, DBA may be useful for short-term trades. “If you have an opinion that something will happen in the agriculture space in the next couple of weeks, by all means, DBA may be a good way to play it,” Mr. Balchunas adds.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies