This is an interesting read on voting and non-voting shares. This is an important topic because there has been debate recently about corporate governance and the lack of voting from passive fund managers. To quickly summarize, in this one case study, non-voting shares dramatically outperformed the voting shares.
Now, this is likely an anomaly as the voting shares spiked when one large buyer (Porsche) drove the price higher. But, this affects the long term return because the dividends during the spike are reinvested at a higher price and thus buy less shares.
This is compounded by the fact that the price of a voting share was consistently higher until about 2010. During this period, dividends were buying less shares. Over time this leads to a lower total return for the voting shares.
More importantly is the notion that voting shares and non-voting shares are relatively similar in terms of price. Thus, non-voting shares could be an alternative for passive funds that do no have an interest in voting. The other benefit here is that non-voting shares would be less exposed to takeovers and takeover attempts because the price of non-voting shares are based on cash flows and not external events.