ACWI vs. INRG.L
ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) and INRG.L (iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index, while INRG.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ACWI returned 13.02%/yr vs 11.27%/yr for INRG.L. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ACWI charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for INRG.L.
Performance
ACWI vs. INRG.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
ACWI is traded in USD, while INRG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the INRG.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACWI achieves a 10.59% return, which is significantly lower than INRG.L's 27.33% return. Over the past 10 years, ACWI has outperformed INRG.L with an annualized return of 13.02%, while INRG.L has yielded a comparatively lower 11.27% annualized return.
ACWI
- 1D
- 0.41%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 10.59%
- 6M
- 11.34%
- 1Y
- 25.40%
- 3Y*
- 19.78%
- 5Y*
- 10.88%
- 10Y*
- 13.02%
INRG.L
- 1D
- 2.56%
- 1M
- -5.13%
- YTD
- 27.33%
- 6M
- 27.07%
- 1Y
- 60.05%
- 3Y*
- 4.87%
- 5Y*
- -0.49%
- 10Y*
- 11.27%
ACWI vs. INRG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF | 10.59% | 22.41% | 17.45% | 22.27% | -18.39% | 18.66% | 16.34% | 26.59% | -9.19% | 24.33% |
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 27.33% | 44.28% | -25.89% | -19.97% | -5.86% | -24.60% | 141.91% | 44.08% | -8.92% | 19.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACWI and INRG.L is 0.53, 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 | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2008 | 0.51 |
The correlation between ACWI and INRG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.45 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.
ACWI vs. INRG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ACWI
INRG.L
Technology
Financial Services
-
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
-
Healthcare
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Technology
ACWI
INRG.L
Financial Services
ACWI
INRG.L
-
Industrials
ACWI
INRG.L
Consumer Cyclical
ACWI
INRG.L
Communication Services
ACWI
INRG.L
-
Healthcare
ACWI
INRG.L
-
Consumer Defensive
ACWI
INRG.L
-
Energy
ACWI
INRG.L
Basic Materials
ACWI
INRG.L
Utilities
ACWI
INRG.L
Real Estate
ACWI
INRG.L
-
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 vs. INRG.L — Risk / Return Rank
ACWI
INRG.L
ACWI vs. INRG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) and iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ACWI | INRG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.35 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.62 | 3.84 | -1.21 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.46 | 14.04 | -2.57 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ACWI vs. INRG.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACWI drawdown since its inception was -56.00%, smaller than the maximum INRG.L drawdown of -93.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWI and INRG.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACWI | INRG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -56.00% | -93.70% | +37.70% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.73% | -15.58% | +5.85% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.55% | -44.14% | +27.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.42% | -57.52% | +31.10% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.53% | -67.67% | +34.14% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.19% | -73.61% | +71.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.60% | -81.17% | +72.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.22% | 4.27% | -2.05% |
Volatility
ACWI vs. INRG.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) is 5.17%, while iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L) has a volatility of 10.77%. This indicates that ACWI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than INRG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACWI | INRG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.17% | 10.77% | -5.60% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.09% | 20.10% | -9.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.42% | 26.30% | -12.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.15% | 26.94% | -10.79% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.14% | 26.70% | -9.56% |
ACWI vs. INRG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACWI has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is lower than INRG.L's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
ACWI vs. INRG.L - Dividend Comparison
ACWI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%, more than INRG.L's 0.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF | 1.40% | 1.55% | 1.70% | 1.88% | 1.79% | 1.71% | 1.43% | 2.33% | 2.18% | 1.94% | 2.19% | 2.56% |
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 0.89% | 1.34% | 1.24% | 0.80% | 0.51% | 0.74% | 0.48% | 1.60% | 2.81% | 2.83% | 2.73% | 2.55% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACWI and INRG.L have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ACWI is cheaper at 0.32% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ACWI is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for INRG.L.
ACWI is categorized as Global Equities, while INRG.L is Energy Equities. ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index, while INRG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for ACWI and 0.65% for INRG.L.
Find the right allocation for ACWI and INRG.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