PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACWL.L vs. LGWS.DE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACWL.L vs. LGWS.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L) and Lyxor MSCI EMU Value UCITS ETF Dist (LGWS.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ACWL.L is traded in GBp, while LGWS.DE is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the LGWS.DE values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACWL.L achieves a 12.44% return, which is significantly higher than LGWS.DE's 5.69% return.


ACWL.L

1D
-0.29%
1M
6.05%
YTD
12.44%
6M
12.71%
1Y
30.24%
3Y*
18.94%
5Y*
12.39%
10Y*
13.73%

LGWS.DE

1D
-0.86%
1M
3.38%
YTD
5.69%
6M
9.74%
1Y
24.57%
3Y*
18.39%
5Y*
12.20%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACWL.L vs. LGWS.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ACWL.L
Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF
12.44%13.63%21.43%13.09%-8.59%20.41%9.74%18.01%2.02%3.75%
LGWS.DE
Lyxor MSCI EMU Value UCITS ETF Dist
5.69%44.19%4.36%11.80%0.16%11.47%-2.69%13.40%-13.28%0.02%

Correlation

The correlation between ACWL.L and LGWS.DE is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.48

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

0.31

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

0.24

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 11, 2017

0.19

Over the past year, ACWL.L and LGWS.DE have become more correlated (0.48) than their long-term average of 0.19, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

ACWL.L vs. LGWS.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACWL.L
ACWL.L Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank

LGWS.DE
LGWS.DE Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
LGWS.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LGWS.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
LGWS.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
LGWS.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
LGWS.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
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.

ACWL.L vs. LGWS.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L) and Lyxor MSCI EMU Value UCITS ETF Dist (LGWS.DE). 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.


ACWL.LLGWS.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.59

1.34

+0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.26

2.52

+1.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.67

8.74

+8.93

ACWL.L vs. LGWS.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.06, which is higher than the LGWS.DE Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACWL.L and LGWS.DE, 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


ACWL.LLGWS.DEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.06

1.88

+1.18

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.90

0.76

+1.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

2.61

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.36

0.43

+1.94

Drawdowns

ACWL.L vs. LGWS.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACWL.L drawdown since its inception was -18.15%, smaller than the maximum LGWS.DE drawdown of -38.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWL.L and LGWS.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACWL.LLGWS.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.15%

-38.30%

+20.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.06%

-9.69%

+2.63%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.15%

-13.45%

-4.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.15%

-20.32%

+2.17%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.29%

-1.66%

+1.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.44%

-6.99%

+4.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.71%

2.80%

-1.09%

Volatility

ACWL.L vs. LGWS.DE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L) is 2.64%, while Lyxor MSCI EMU Value UCITS ETF Dist (LGWS.DE) has a volatility of 3.85%. This indicates that ACWL.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LGWS.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACWL.LLGWS.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.64%

3.85%

-1.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.02%

10.48%

-3.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.88%

13.04%

-3.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.54%

15.82%

+0.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.34%

17.84%

+5.50%

ACWL.L vs. LGWS.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACWL.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than LGWS.DE's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACWL.L vs. LGWS.DE - Dividend Comparison

ACWL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LGWS.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.08%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
ACWL.L
Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
LGWS.DE
Lyxor MSCI EMU Value UCITS ETF Dist
3.08%3.29%4.24%0.00%4.69%2.83%2.72%4.37%4.77%0.38%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACWL.L and LGWS.DE have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, LGWS.DE is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LGWS.DE is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for ACWL.L.

ACWL.L is categorized as Global Equities, while LGWS.DE is Europe Equities. ACWL.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while LGWS.DE tracks MSCI EMU Value. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for ACWL.L and 0.40% for LGWS.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ACWL.L and LGWS.DE

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