PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACWV vs. BTAL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACWV vs. BTAL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and AGFiQ US Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund (BTAL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACWV achieves a 2.88% return, which is significantly higher than BTAL's -20.15% return. Over the past 10 years, ACWV has outperformed BTAL with an annualized return of 7.48%, while BTAL has yielded a comparatively lower -5.05% annualized return.


ACWV

1D
0.34%
1M
0.59%
YTD
2.88%
6M
2.95%
1Y
5.56%
3Y*
9.98%
5Y*
5.46%
10Y*
7.48%

BTAL

1D
-0.09%
1M
-4.17%
YTD
-20.15%
6M
-19.27%
1Y
-37.44%
3Y*
-12.17%
5Y*
-4.94%
10Y*
-5.05%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACWV vs. BTAL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ACWV
iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF
2.88%11.04%11.38%8.23%-10.36%13.97%3.04%21.04%-1.42%18.57%
BTAL
AGFiQ US Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund
-20.15%-20.17%12.83%-15.11%20.48%-6.81%-13.86%1.07%15.13%-2.13%

Correlation

The correlation between ACWV and BTAL is -0.13, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.13

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

-0.18

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

-0.28

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

-0.24

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 20, 2011

-0.26

The correlation between ACWV and BTAL shifts across timeframes, from -0.28 (5 years) to -0.13 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ACWV vs. BTAL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ACWV
BTAL

Technology

22.6%
19.5%

Healthcare

13.2%
10.2%

Financial Services

13.1%
14.9%

Communication Services

12.2%
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

10.3%
5.6%

Industrials

7.9%
13.7%

Utilities

7.8%
5.2%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
12.8%

Energy

3.4%
4.4%

Basic Materials

1.8%
4.0%

Real Estate

0.8%
6.2%

Technology

ACWV
22.6%
BTAL
19.5%

Healthcare

ACWV
13.2%
BTAL
10.2%

Financial Services

ACWV
13.1%
BTAL
14.9%

Communication Services

ACWV
12.2%
BTAL
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

ACWV
10.3%
BTAL
5.6%

Industrials

ACWV
7.9%
BTAL
13.7%

Utilities

ACWV
7.8%
BTAL
5.2%

Consumer Cyclical

ACWV
5.1%
BTAL
12.8%

Energy

ACWV
3.4%
BTAL
4.4%

Basic Materials

ACWV
1.8%
BTAL
4.0%

Real Estate

ACWV
0.8%
BTAL
6.2%

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

ACWV vs. BTAL — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACWV
ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

BTAL
BTAL Risk / Return Rank: 00
Overall Rank
BTAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 00
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BTAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 00
Sortino Ratio Rank
BTAL Omega Ratio Rank: 00
Omega Ratio Rank
BTAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 00
Calmar Ratio Rank
BTAL Martin Ratio Rank: 11
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.

ACWV vs. BTAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and AGFiQ US Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund (BTAL). 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.


ACWVBTALDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

0.73

+0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.76

-0.98

+1.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.31

-1.64

+3.94

ACWV vs. BTAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACWV Sharpe Ratio is 0.62, which is higher than the BTAL Sharpe Ratio of -1.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACWV and BTAL, 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...

Drawdowns

ACWV vs. BTAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACWV drawdown since its inception was -28.82%, smaller than the maximum BTAL drawdown of -50.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWV and BTAL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACWVBTALDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.82%

-50.28%

+21.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.37%

-37.50%

+31.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.56%

-45.16%

+37.60%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.14%

-45.16%

+27.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.82%

-50.28%

+21.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.42%

-50.23%

+47.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.11%

-22.01%

+18.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.10%

22.38%

-20.28%

Volatility

ACWV vs. BTAL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) is 2.18%, while AGFiQ US Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund (BTAL) has a volatility of 8.74%. This indicates that ACWV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BTAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACWVBTALDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.18%

8.74%

-6.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.63%

16.58%

-10.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.80%

22.49%

-14.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.23%

18.96%

-8.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.30%

17.33%

-5.03%

ACWV vs. BTAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACWV has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than BTAL's 2.11% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACWV vs. BTAL - Dividend Comparison

ACWV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.03%, less than BTAL's 3.11% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWV
iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF
2.03%2.09%2.33%2.41%2.18%1.92%1.77%2.54%2.32%2.04%2.56%2.28%
BTAL
AGFiQ US Market Neutral Anti-Beta Fund
3.11%2.49%3.49%6.14%1.01%0.00%0.00%0.88%0.39%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACWV and BTAL have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BTAL has higher volatility (8.74%) compared to ACWV (2.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACWV dropped -28.82% vs BTAL's -50.28%.

On 10-year performance, ACWV leads with 7.48% vs -5.05% for BTAL. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 2.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ACWV has performed better with a 7.48% return vs -5.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 2.11% for BTAL.

BTAL has the higher dividend yield at 3.11%, compared with 2.03% for ACWV.

ACWV is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BTAL is Long-Short. ACWV tracks MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index, while BTAL tracks Dow Jones U.S. Thematic Market Neutral Anti-Beta Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and AGF. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ACWV and 2.11% for BTAL.

ACWV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.62 vs -1.64), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ACWV and BTAL

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