PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.L) and SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ACWD.L is traded in USD, while FNCW.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FNCW.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACWD.L achieves a 7.87% return, which is significantly higher than FNCW.L's -0.52% return. Over the past 10 years, ACWD.L has outperformed FNCW.L with an annualized return of 12.41%, while FNCW.L has yielded a comparatively lower 8.42% annualized return.


ACWD.L

1D
-1.23%
1M
-1.03%
YTD
7.87%
6M
9.05%
1Y
24.10%
3Y*
19.72%
5Y*
10.52%
10Y*
12.41%

FNCW.L

1D
-0.24%
1M
0.54%
YTD
-0.52%
6M
3.12%
1Y
13.35%
3Y*
23.28%
5Y*
4.46%
10Y*
8.42%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ACWD.L
SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF
7.87%22.83%17.76%22.27%-18.37%18.77%15.91%25.80%-9.85%24.09%
FNCW.L
SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF
-0.52%29.48%26.60%15.73%-33.29%26.73%0.14%30.57%-21.66%34.31%

Correlation

The correlation between ACWD.L and FNCW.L is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.70

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.73

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2011

0.65

The correlation between ACWD.L and FNCW.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ACWD.L
FNCW.L

Technology

29.2%
1.4%

Financial Services

16.5%
98.2%

Industrials

10.9%
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

9.3%
0.1%

Communication Services

9.0%

-

Healthcare

8.0%
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%

-

Energy

4.3%
0.1%

Basic Materials

3.6%

-

Utilities

2.7%
0.1%

Real Estate

1.7%
0.1%

Technology

ACWD.L
29.2%
FNCW.L
1.4%

Financial Services

ACWD.L
16.5%
FNCW.L
98.2%

Industrials

ACWD.L
10.9%
FNCW.L
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

ACWD.L
9.3%
FNCW.L
0.1%

Communication Services

ACWD.L
9.0%
FNCW.L

-

Healthcare

ACWD.L
8.0%
FNCW.L
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

ACWD.L
4.9%
FNCW.L

-

Energy

ACWD.L
4.3%
FNCW.L
0.1%

Basic Materials

ACWD.L
3.6%
FNCW.L

-

Utilities

ACWD.L
2.7%
FNCW.L
0.1%

Real Estate

ACWD.L
1.7%
FNCW.L
0.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ACWD.L
ACWD.L Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
ACWD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

FNCW.L
FNCW.L Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
FNCW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNCW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNCW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
FNCW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNCW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.L) and SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


ACWD.LFNCW.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.91

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.17

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.75

1.16

+1.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.33

3.89

+7.44

ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACWD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.89, which is higher than the FNCW.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACWD.L and FNCW.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ACWD.LFNCW.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.89

0.98

+0.91

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

0.21

+0.46

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

0.36

+0.42

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.64

0.28

+0.36

Drawdowns

ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACWD.L drawdown since its inception was -33.64%, smaller than the maximum FNCW.L drawdown of -54.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWD.L and FNCW.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACWD.LFNCW.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.64%

-54.46%

+20.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.73%

-11.41%

+2.68%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.51%

-15.90%

-0.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.18%

-47.30%

+21.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.64%

-54.46%

+20.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.96%

-2.61%

-1.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.89%

-15.93%

+11.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.12%

3.42%

-1.30%

Volatility

ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.L) has a higher volatility of 4.13% compared to SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L) at 3.16%. This indicates that ACWD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNCW.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACWD.LFNCW.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.13%

3.16%

+0.97%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.12%

10.69%

-0.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.72%

13.62%

-0.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.60%

20.88%

-5.28%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.86%

23.12%

-7.26%

ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACWD.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than FNCW.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACWD.L vs. FNCW.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ACWD.L nor FNCW.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


ACWD.L and FNCW.L have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ACWD.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ACWD.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for FNCW.L.

ACWD.L is categorized as Global Equities, while FNCW.L is Financials Equities. ACWD.L tracks MSCI ACWI Index, while FNCW.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for ACWD.L and 0.30% for FNCW.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ACWD.L and FNCW.L

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer