ACWI vs. KLMT

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) and KLMT (Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF) are both Global Equities funds - ACWI tracks the MSCI All Country World Index while KLMT tracks the MSCI ACWI Select Climate 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ACWI returned 29.24% vs 27.90% for KLMT. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. ACWI charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for KLMT.

Performance

ACWI vs. KLMT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) and Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with ACWI having a 12.47% return and KLMT slightly lower at 12.41%.

ACWI

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: 4.45%
• YTD: 12.47%
• 6M: 13.07%
• 1Y: 29.24%
• 3Y*: 21.38%
• 5Y*: 11.35%
• 10Y*: 12.82%

KLMT

• 1D: 0.33%
• 1M: 4.70%
• YTD: 12.41%
• 6M: 13.13%
• 1Y: 27.90%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACWI vs. KLMT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	12.47%	22.41%	5.40%
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	12.41%	21.31%	4.94%

Correlation

The correlation between ACWI and KLMT 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 Jun 27, 2024	0.98

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

ACWI vs. KLMT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ACWI	KLMT
Technology	29.4%	30.0%
Financial Services	16.1%	16.9%
Industrials	10.9%	10.2%
Consumer Cyclical	9.3%	9.2%
Communication Services	9.0%	9.6%
Healthcare	8.1%	8.0%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	4.6%
Energy	4.2%	4.1%
Basic Materials	3.7%	2.8%
Utilities	2.6%	2.0%
Real Estate	1.8%	2.7%

Return for Risk

ACWI vs. KLMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACWI

ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 70
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 71
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 73

KLMT

KLMT Risk / Return Rank: 67
KLMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
KLMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
KLMT Omega Ratio Rank: 68
KLMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
KLMT Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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 vs. KLMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) and Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT). 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	KLMT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.30	2.22	+0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.17	3.10	+0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.40	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.02	2.94	+0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.55	12.77	+0.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ACWI vs. KLMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACWI Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is comparable to the KLMT Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACWI and KLMT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ACWI	KLMT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.30	2.22	+0.07
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.75	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	1.29	-0.86

Drawdowns

ACWI vs. KLMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACWI drawdown since its inception was -56.00%, which is greater than KLMT's maximum drawdown of -16.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWI and KLMT.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACWI	KLMT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.00%	-16.87%	-39.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.73%	-9.54%	-0.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.55%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.42%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.53%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.53%	-0.45%	-0.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.61%	-1.91%	-6.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.16%	2.19%	-0.03%

Volatility

ACWI vs. KLMT - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) and Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) have volatilities of 3.83% and 3.71%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ACWI	KLMT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.83%	3.71%	+0.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.30%	10.07%	+0.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.79%	12.61%	+0.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.05%	15.83%	+0.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.11%	15.83%	+1.28%

ACWI vs. KLMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACWI has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is higher than KLMT's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACWI vs. KLMT - Dividend Comparison

ACWI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, less than KLMT's 1.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	1.38%	1.55%	1.70%	1.88%	1.79%	1.71%	1.43%	2.33%	2.18%	1.94%	2.19%	2.56%
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	1.74%	1.95%	0.85%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACWI and KLMT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, ACWI and KLMT 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.

Which is riskier, ACWI or KLMT?

ACWI has higher volatility (3.83%) compared to KLMT (3.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACWI dropped -56.00% vs KLMT's -16.87%.

Which ETF is better, ACWI or KLMT?

On 1-year performance, ACWI leads with 29.24% vs 27.90% for KLMT. On fees, KLMT is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, KLMT has been the lower-risk option at 3.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ACWI or KLMT?

Over the 1-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 29.24% return vs 27.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ACWI or KLMT?

KLMT is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ACWI or KLMT?

KLMT has the higher dividend yield at 1.74%, compared with 1.38% for ACWI.

What is the main difference between ACWI and KLMT?

ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index, while KLMT tracks MSCI ACWI Select Climate 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for ACWI and 0.10% for KLMT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 2.22), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.