ACWV vs. RSSY
ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) and RSSY (Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. ACWV is passively managed, while RSSY is actively managed. Over the past year, ACWV returned 4.79% vs 47.81% for RSSY. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ACWV charges 0.20%/yr vs 1.04%/yr for RSSY.
Performance
ACWV vs. RSSY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACWV achieves a 2.36% return, which is significantly lower than RSSY's 32.45% return.
ACWV
- 1D
- -0.62%
- 1M
- 1.01%
- YTD
- 2.36%
- 6M
- 2.56%
- 1Y
- 4.79%
- 3Y*
- 10.06%
- 5Y*
- 5.47%
- 10Y*
- 7.36%
RSSY
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 1.78%
- YTD
- 32.45%
- 6M
- 27.13%
- 1Y
- 47.81%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ACWV vs. RSSY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF | 2.36% | 11.04% | 8.40% |
RSSY Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF | 32.45% | -3.52% | 1.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACWV and RSSY 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2024 | 0.26 |
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. RSSY — Risk / Return Rank
ACWV
RSSY
ACWV vs. RSSY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF (RSSY). 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.
| ACWV | RSSY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.85 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | 1.65 | -0.54 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.76 | 6.53 | -5.77 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.37 | 22.39 | -20.03 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ACWV | RSSY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.62 | 3.63 | -3.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.54 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.60 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.71 | 0.75 | -0.04 |
Drawdowns
ACWV vs. RSSY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACWV drawdown since its inception was -28.82%, roughly equal to the maximum RSSY drawdown of -29.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWV and RSSY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACWV | RSSY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.82% | -29.57% | +0.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.37% | -7.36% | +0.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.56% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.14% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.82% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.92% | -0.16% | -2.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.11% | -7.37% | +4.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.03% | 2.14% | -0.11% |
Volatility
ACWV vs. RSSY - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) is 1.79%, while Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF (RSSY) has a volatility of 2.30%. This indicates that ACWV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RSSY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACWV | RSSY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.79% | 2.30% | -0.51% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.54% | 9.92% | -4.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.71% | 13.28% | -5.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.23% | 18.35% | -8.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.30% | 18.35% | -6.05% |
ACWV vs. RSSY - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACWV has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than RSSY's 1.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
ACWV vs. RSSY - Dividend Comparison
ACWV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.04%, more than RSSY's 1.54% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF | 2.04% | 2.09% | 2.33% | 2.41% | 2.18% | 1.92% | 1.77% | 2.54% | 2.32% | 2.04% | 2.56% | 2.28% |
RSSY Return Stacked US Stocks & Futures Yield ETF | 1.54% | 2.04% | 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 RSSY 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.
RSSY has higher volatility (2.30%) compared to ACWV (1.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACWV dropped -28.82% vs RSSY's -29.57%.
On 1-year performance, RSSY leads with 47.81% vs 4.79% for ACWV. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 1.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RSSY has performed better with a 47.81% return vs 4.79%. 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 1.04% for RSSY.
ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 2.04%, compared with 1.54% for RSSY.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Return Stacked. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ACWV and 1.04% for RSSY.
RSSY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.63 vs 0.62), 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 RSSY
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