PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACWI.L vs. WRDA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACWI.L vs. WRDA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF (ACWI.L) and UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc (WRDA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ACWI.L is traded in GBP, while WRDA.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the WRDA.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACWI.L achieves a 11.87% return, which is significantly higher than WRDA.L's 10.09% return.


ACWI.L

1D
-0.37%
1M
5.83%
YTD
11.87%
6M
12.47%
1Y
30.54%
3Y*
18.34%
5Y*
12.53%
10Y*
13.66%

WRDA.L

1D
-0.19%
1M
5.30%
YTD
10.09%
6M
10.62%
1Y
27.48%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACWI.L vs. WRDA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
ACWI.L
SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
11.87%14.32%18.83%
WRDA.L
UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc
10.09%12.77%20.02%

Correlation

The correlation between ACWI.L and WRDA.L is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.97

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024

0.98

The correlation between ACWI.L and WRDA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

ACWI.L vs. WRDA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACWI.L
ACWI.L Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
ACWI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

WRDA.L
WRDA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
WRDA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WRDA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
WRDA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
WRDA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
WRDA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

ACWI.L vs. WRDA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF (ACWI.L) and UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc (WRDA.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.


ACWI.LWRDA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.29

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

1.52

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.31

4.19

+0.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.47

16.71

+0.75

ACWI.L vs. WRDA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACWI.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.92, which is comparable to the WRDA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACWI.L and WRDA.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


ACWI.LWRDA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.92

2.73

+0.19

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.96

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.95

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.81

1.51

-0.70

Drawdowns

ACWI.L vs. WRDA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACWI.L drawdown since its inception was -25.44%, which is greater than WRDA.L's maximum drawdown of -18.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWI.L and WRDA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACWI.LWRDA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.44%

-18.38%

-7.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.05%

-6.53%

-0.52%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.07%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.07%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.37%

-0.19%

-0.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.67%

-2.28%

-1.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.74%

1.64%

+0.10%

Volatility

ACWI.L vs. WRDA.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF (ACWI.L) has a higher volatility of 2.89% compared to UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc (WRDA.L) at 2.48%. This indicates that ACWI.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WRDA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACWI.LWRDA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.89%

2.48%

+0.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.76%

7.16%

+0.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.45%

10.07%

+0.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.05%

12.35%

+0.70%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.39%

12.35%

+2.04%

ACWI.L vs. WRDA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACWI.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than WRDA.L's 0.06% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACWI.L vs. WRDA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ACWI.L nor WRDA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.97, ACWI.L and WRDA.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, WRDA.L is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

WRDA.L is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for ACWI.L.

ACWI.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while WRDA.L tracks MSCI World Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ACWI.L and 0.06% for WRDA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ACWI.L and WRDA.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