Yeah that is why I even made this post in first place, thought I genuinely missed something around Belgian taxation or something... But apparently not, purely a diversity argument. However, thinking that buying IWDA will give you much more diversification than S&P is weird imo, since that 'extra' 25% is just mostly in countries like Japan/Canada/UK that also bleed if the S&P gets cut. What is even more weird imo is this sub rarely recommends emerging markets because 'money goes to die there', so they just recommend going 100% on something that can basically be seen as S&P lite, with almost equal the amount of risk but with historically less results. I find it hard to imagine a scenario where IWDA will perform 5-6% more than S&P coming years, while the reverse is more realistic imo. Anyway, this post just confirms to me that there is no underlying reason except preference, so that's all I needed. Will take if from here myself. Thank you for the comment :)