Performance data is updated to 31 May 2026.
Macquarie Walter Scott Global Equity Active ETF (MQWS) — Review & Analysis
MQWS is an actively managed global equity ETF sub-advised by Walter Scott & Partners, an Edinburgh-based fundamental investor with a long-term, low-turnover approach. AUM is $2.79 billion as at May 2026 — making MQWS one of the largest active equity ETFs on the ASX. The benchmark is the MSCI World ex Australia Index in AUD unhedged. The 1.28% p.a. management fee is well above passive alternatives and reflects the active management overlay. Compare MQWS across the all ETFs directory.
MQWS competes against passive global equity funds like VGS (0.18%), BGBL (0.08%) and IWLD — funds that deliver the same benchmark exposure at a fraction of the fee. The 1.10%+ fee gap is substantial, and MQWS needs to outperform passive alternatives by at least that margin net of fees just to break even. Walter Scott's investment style focuses on high-quality growth companies held for decades, with turnover well below 20% per year — closer to a long-term concentrated portfolio than a benchmark-aware mandate.
The Walter Scott approach has a long institutional track record globally — the firm has managed money for major pensions and sovereign wealth funds since 1983. The active management thesis is straightforward: Walter Scott's bottom-up research, long holding periods, and quality screen produce a portfolio that compounds materially differently from a market-cap-weighted global index. Whether that justifies 1.28% p.a. depends entirely on net-of-fee returns, which are publicly available in the fund's reporting.
MQWS is unhedged. Investors choosing MQWS over passive global equity are making an explicit bet on long-term active outperformance net of fees. Our active vs passive ETFs guide covers the data on when active management has and hasn't delivered across markets.
Performance (% return)

Investment Focus
Exposure Regions
Related Reads

Active vs Passive ETFs: The Data That Settles the Debate
In 2025, 74% of Australian active equity fund managers failed to beat their benchmark. Not just by a little — the majority trailed the index over every time horizon measured. And this isn't a one-year blip. Stretch the window to 15 years and that number climbs to 87%.

Australian vs Global ETFs: What 15 Years of Data Actually Shows
Many Australian investors are heavily overweight domestic shares — often 50% or more of their portfolio. The reasons are familiar: franking credits, dividends, familiarity, and the comfort of owning companies you know. But Australia represents just 2% of global stock market capitalisation. By overweighting Australia, you're making a concentrated bet on banks and miners while missing the technology, healthcare, and consumer companies that have driven global returns.
Similar ETFs
Disclaimer
The information provided on ReviewETF.com.au is intended for general information and comparison purposes only. It is compiled and presented on a best-endeavours basis from publicly available sources, but we do not guarantee its accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or suitability for any particular purpose.
No content on this website constitutes financial advice, investment recommendation, solicitation, or an offer to buy or sell any securities. Past performance is not indicative of future results, and all investments carry risk, including the potential loss of capital.
The point of truth for any ETF is always the official product disclosure statement (PDS), website, and announcements from the ETF issuer/provider (e.g., Vanguard, BetaShares, iShares, VanEck, etc.). We link directly to these primary sources on each individual ETF page wherever possible—please verify all details there before making any decisions.
ReviewETF.com.au, its owner (Joshua), and any associated entities disclaim all liability for any loss or damage arising from the use of, or reliance on, information contained on this site. Users should seek independent professional financial advice tailored to their personal circumstances.
This website may contain links to third-party sites; we are not responsible for their content or privacy practices.
Last updated: January 2026

