ACWV vs. OUNZ
ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) and OUNZ (VanEck Merk Gold ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ACWV is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index, while OUNZ is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ACWV returned 6.94%/yr vs 11.37%/yr for OUNZ. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ACWV charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for OUNZ.
Performance
ACWV vs. OUNZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACWV achieves a 3.37% return, which is significantly higher than OUNZ's -7.16% return. Over the past 10 years, ACWV has underperformed OUNZ with an annualized return of 6.94%, while OUNZ has yielded a comparatively higher 11.37% annualized 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%
OUNZ
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- -5.03%
- 6M
- -12.66%
- YTD
- -7.16%
- 1Y
- 19.37%
- 3Y*
- 26.53%
- 5Y*
- 17.02%
- 10Y*
- 11.37%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.39%
ACWV vs. OUNZ - 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% |
OUNZ VanEck Merk Gold ETF | -7.16% | 63.95% | 26.75% | 12.83% | -0.51% | -4.00% | 24.71% | 18.00% | -2.06% | 12.82% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACWV and OUNZ is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2014 | 0.16 |
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. OUNZ — Risk / Return Rank
ACWV
OUNZ
ACWV vs. OUNZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and VanEck Merk Gold ETF (OUNZ). 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 | OUNZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.08 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.14 | 1.15 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.94 | 0.74 | +0.20 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.68 | 1.73 | +0.95 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ACWV vs. OUNZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACWV drawdown since its inception was -28.82%, which is greater than OUNZ's maximum drawdown of -26.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWV and OUNZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACWV | OUNZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.82% | -26.31% | -2.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.37% | -26.31% | +19.94% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.56% | -26.31% | +18.75% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.14% | -26.31% | +8.17% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.82% | -26.31% | -2.51% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.96% | -25.79% | +23.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.11% | -7.73% | +4.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.24% | 11.23% | -8.99% |
Volatility
ACWV vs. OUNZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) is 2.99%, while VanEck Merk Gold ETF (OUNZ) has a volatility of 6.41%. This indicates that ACWV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than OUNZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACWV | OUNZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.99% | 6.41% | -3.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.26% | 23.99% | -17.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.03% | 27.86% | -19.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.28% | 18.33% | -8.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.29% | 16.12% | -3.83% |
ACWV vs. OUNZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACWV has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than OUNZ's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, 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. OUNZ - Dividend Comparison
ACWV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, while OUNZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| 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% |
OUNZ VanEck Merk Gold ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACWV and OUNZ have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
OUNZ has higher volatility (6.41%) compared to ACWV (2.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACWV dropped -28.82% vs OUNZ's -26.31%.
On 10-year performance, OUNZ leads with 11.37% vs 6.94% for ACWV. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 2.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, OUNZ has performed better with a 11.37% return vs 6.94%. 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 0.25% for OUNZ.
ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.94%, compared with 0.00% for OUNZ.
ACWV is categorized as Global Equities, while OUNZ is Gold. ACWV tracks MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index, while OUNZ tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ACWV and 0.25% for OUNZ.
ACWV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.75 vs 0.70), 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 OUNZ
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