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

Performance

ACWV vs. GVAL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL). 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 3.42% return, which is significantly lower than GVAL's 18.91% return. Over the past 10 years, ACWV has underperformed GVAL with an annualized return of 6.98%, while GVAL has yielded a comparatively higher 11.17% annualized return.


ACWV

1D
-0.39%
1M
0.53%
6M
2.85%
YTD
3.42%
1Y
5.53%
3Y*
9.73%
5Y*
5.39%
10Y*
6.98%

GVAL

1D
1.26%
1M
1.95%
6M
13.74%
YTD
18.91%
1Y
38.32%
3Y*
25.96%
5Y*
15.17%
10Y*
11.17%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACWV vs. GVAL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ACWV
iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF
3.42%11.04%11.38%8.23%-10.36%13.97%3.04%21.04%-1.42%18.57%
GVAL
Cambria Global Value ETF
18.91%55.87%2.59%13.30%-7.98%10.70%-8.51%17.24%-14.30%29.50%

Correlation

The correlation between ACWV and GVAL is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.49

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

0.55

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

0.58

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

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 12, 2014

0.63

The correlation between ACWV and GVAL shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.63 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ACWV vs. GVAL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ACWV
GVAL

Technology

25.8%
8.2%

Financial Services

13.2%
18.4%

Healthcare

13.0%

-

Communication Services

11.9%
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

9.8%
1.9%

Industrials

8.1%
4.6%

Utilities

7.3%
5.0%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
3.1%

Energy

3.7%
6.9%

Basic Materials

1.5%
8.7%

Real Estate

0.6%
6.4%

Technology

ACWV
25.8%
GVAL
8.2%

Financial Services

ACWV
13.2%
GVAL
18.4%

Healthcare

ACWV
13.0%
GVAL

-

Communication Services

ACWV
11.9%
GVAL
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

ACWV
9.8%
GVAL
1.9%

Industrials

ACWV
8.1%
GVAL
4.6%

Utilities

ACWV
7.3%
GVAL
5.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ACWV
5.1%
GVAL
3.1%

Energy

ACWV
3.7%
GVAL
6.9%

Basic Materials

ACWV
1.5%
GVAL
8.7%

Real Estate

ACWV
0.6%
GVAL
6.4%

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. GVAL — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACWV
ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

GVAL
GVAL Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
GVAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GVAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
GVAL Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
GVAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
GVAL Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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. GVAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL). 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.


ACWVGVALDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.76

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.43

-0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.87

3.35

-2.47

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.49

12.39

-9.89

ACWV vs. GVAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACWV Sharpe Ratio is 0.69, which is lower than the GVAL Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACWV and GVAL, 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. GVAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACWV drawdown since its inception was -28.82%, smaller than the maximum GVAL drawdown of -46.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWV and GVAL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACWVGVALDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.82%

-46.82%

+18.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.37%

-11.50%

+5.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.56%

-15.72%

+8.16%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.14%

-30.83%

+12.69%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.82%

-46.82%

+18.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.91%

-1.05%

-0.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.11%

-13.77%

+10.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.22%

3.10%

-0.88%

Volatility

ACWV vs. GVAL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) is 3.15%, while Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL) has a volatility of 5.51%. This indicates that ACWV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GVAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACWVGVALDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.15%

5.51%

-2.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.25%

14.09%

-7.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.06%

15.71%

-7.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.27%

18.62%

-8.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.29%

18.98%

-6.69%

ACWV vs. GVAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACWV has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than GVAL's 0.64% expense ratio.


Dividends

ACWV vs. GVAL - Dividend Comparison

ACWV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, less than GVAL's 2.40% 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%
GVAL
Cambria Global Value ETF
2.40%2.93%4.75%6.12%5.05%2.97%1.90%2.84%4.65%2.00%2.54%2.11%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACWV and GVAL have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GVAL has higher volatility (5.51%) compared to ACWV (3.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACWV dropped -28.82% vs GVAL's -46.82%.

On 10-year performance, GVAL leads with 11.17% vs 6.98% for ACWV. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 3.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GVAL has performed better with a 11.17% return vs 6.98%. 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 0.64% for GVAL.

GVAL has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 1.94% for ACWV.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ACWV and 0.64% for GVAL.

GVAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 0.69), 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 GVAL

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