ACWV vs. FDLO
ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) and FDLO (Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ACWV is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index, while FDLO is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund tracking the Fidelity U.S. Low Volatility Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ACWV returned 5.45%/yr vs 9.21%/yr for FDLO. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ACWV charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FDLO.
Performance
ACWV vs. FDLO - Performance Comparison
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%
ACWV vs. FDLO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Healthcare
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
Utilities
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
ACWV
FDLO
Healthcare
ACWV
FDLO
Financial Services
ACWV
FDLO
Communication Services
ACWV
FDLO
Consumer Defensive
ACWV
FDLO
Industrials
ACWV
FDLO
Utilities
ACWV
FDLO
Consumer Cyclical
ACWV
FDLO
Energy
ACWV
FDLO
Basic Materials
ACWV
FDLO
Real Estate
ACWV
FDLO
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
ACWV
FDLO
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.
| ACWV | FDLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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
| ACWV | FDLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.96% | -0.80% | -1.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.11% | -3.35% | +0.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| ACWV | FDLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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