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

Performance

ACWV vs. FDLO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF (FDLO). 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 3.37% return, which is significantly lower than FDLO's 5.53% return.


ACWV

1D
-0.03%
1M
2.00%
6M
2.51%
YTD
3.37%
1Y
5.99%
3Y*
9.33%
5Y*
5.45%
10Y*
6.94%
ALL TIME*
8.60%

FDLO

1D
-0.26%
1M
2.39%
6M
3.93%
YTD
5.53%
1Y
12.36%
3Y*
12.82%
5Y*
9.21%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
12.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACWV vs. FDLO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ACWV
iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF
3.37%11.04%11.38%8.23%-10.36%13.97%3.04%21.04%-1.42%18.57%
FDLO
Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF
5.53%11.77%16.06%16.38%-10.38%24.00%12.19%31.10%-0.26%20.44%

Correlation

The correlation between ACWV and FDLO is 0.73, 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

0.73

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

0.78

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

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2016

0.85

The correlation between ACWV and FDLO shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (1 year) to 0.85 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ACWV vs. FDLO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ACWV
FDLO

Technology

25.3%
33.2%

Healthcare

13.8%
10.6%

Financial Services

13.5%
13.1%

Communication Services

11.3%
10.1%

Consumer Defensive

9.7%
4.7%

Industrials

8.1%
8.7%

Utilities

7.5%
2.4%

Consumer Cyclical

5.3%
10.0%

Energy

3.5%
3.1%

Basic Materials

1.5%
1.8%

Real Estate

0.6%
2.3%

Technology

ACWV
25.3%
FDLO
33.2%

Healthcare

ACWV
13.8%
FDLO
10.6%

Financial Services

ACWV
13.5%
FDLO
13.1%

Communication Services

ACWV
11.3%
FDLO
10.1%

Consumer Defensive

ACWV
9.7%
FDLO
4.7%

Industrials

ACWV
8.1%
FDLO
8.7%

Utilities

ACWV
7.5%
FDLO
2.4%

Consumer Cyclical

ACWV
5.3%
FDLO
10.0%

Energy

ACWV
3.5%
FDLO
3.1%

Basic Materials

ACWV
1.5%
FDLO
1.8%

Real Estate

ACWV
0.6%
FDLO
2.3%

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. FDLO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACWV
ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

FDLO
FDLO Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
FDLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDLO Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
FDLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDLO Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
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. FDLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF (FDLO). 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.


ACWVFDLODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.64

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.25

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.94

1.74

-0.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.68

7.06

-4.38

ACWV vs. FDLO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACWV Sharpe Ratio is 0.75, which is lower than the FDLO Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACWV and FDLO, 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. FDLO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACWV drawdown since its inception was -28.82%, smaller than the maximum FDLO drawdown of -34.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWV and FDLO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACWVFDLODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.82%

-34.35%

+5.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.37%

-7.13%

+0.76%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.56%

-13.68%

+6.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.14%

-19.23%

+1.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.96%

-0.80%

-1.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.11%

-3.35%

+0.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.24%

1.76%

+0.48%

Volatility

ACWV vs. FDLO - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF (FDLO) have volatilities of 2.99% and 2.91%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACWVFDLODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.99%

2.91%

+0.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.26%

6.98%

-0.72%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.03%

8.97%

-0.94%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.28%

13.09%

-2.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.29%

15.45%

-3.16%

ACWV vs. FDLO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACWV has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than FDLO's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

ACWV vs. FDLO - Dividend Comparison

ACWV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, more than FDLO's 1.41% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWV
iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF
1.94%2.09%2.33%2.41%2.18%1.92%1.77%2.54%2.32%2.04%2.56%2.28%
FDLO
Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF
1.41%1.37%1.40%1.35%1.49%1.11%1.38%1.55%1.76%1.61%0.55%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACWV and FDLO have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ACWV has higher volatility (2.99%) compared to FDLO (2.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACWV dropped -28.82% vs FDLO's -34.35%.

On 5-year performance, FDLO leads with 9.21% vs 5.45% for ACWV. On fees, FDLO is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FDLO has performed better with a 9.21% return vs 5.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FDLO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for ACWV.

ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.94%, compared with 1.41% for FDLO.

ACWV is categorized as Global Equities, while FDLO is Volatility Hedged Equity. ACWV tracks MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index, while FDLO tracks Fidelity U.S. Low Volatility Factor Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ACWV and 0.15% for FDLO.

FDLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.39 vs 0.75), 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 FDLO

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