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

Performance

ACWV vs. SPGM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM). 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 SPGM's 12.31% return. Over the past 10 years, ACWV has underperformed SPGM with an annualized return of 6.98%, while SPGM has yielded a comparatively higher 12.68% 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%

SPGM

1D
0.49%
1M
0.47%
6M
9.50%
YTD
12.31%
1Y
25.35%
3Y*
19.37%
5Y*
11.31%
10Y*
12.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACWV vs. SPGM - 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%
SPGM
SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF
12.31%23.62%16.75%21.34%-17.53%21.13%15.28%26.58%-10.12%23.26%

Correlation

The correlation between ACWV and SPGM is 0.55, 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

0.55

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

0.64

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

0.74

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

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2012

0.67

The correlation between ACWV and SPGM shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.75 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ACWV vs. SPGM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ACWV
SPGM

Technology

25.8%
30.7%

Financial Services

13.2%
15.7%

Healthcare

13.0%
7.9%

Communication Services

11.9%
8.2%

Consumer Defensive

9.8%
4.5%

Industrials

8.1%
12.5%

Utilities

7.3%
2.0%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
9.0%

Energy

3.7%
4.0%

Basic Materials

1.5%
3.8%

Real Estate

0.6%
1.8%

Technology

ACWV
25.8%
SPGM
30.7%

Financial Services

ACWV
13.2%
SPGM
15.7%

Healthcare

ACWV
13.0%
SPGM
7.9%

Communication Services

ACWV
11.9%
SPGM
8.2%

Consumer Defensive

ACWV
9.8%
SPGM
4.5%

Industrials

ACWV
8.1%
SPGM
12.5%

Utilities

ACWV
7.3%
SPGM
2.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ACWV
5.1%
SPGM
9.0%

Energy

ACWV
3.7%
SPGM
4.0%

Basic Materials

ACWV
1.5%
SPGM
3.8%

Real Estate

ACWV
0.6%
SPGM
1.8%

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. SPGM — 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

SPGM
SPGM Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
SPGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPGM Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
SPGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPGM Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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. SPGM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) and SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM). 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.


ACWVSPGMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.33

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.87

2.68

-1.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.49

11.56

-9.06

ACWV vs. SPGM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACWV Sharpe Ratio is 0.69, which is lower than the SPGM Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACWV and SPGM, 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. SPGM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACWV drawdown since its inception was -28.82%, smaller than the maximum SPGM drawdown of -33.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACWV and SPGM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACWVSPGMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.82%

-33.97%

+5.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.37%

-9.50%

+3.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.56%

-16.90%

+9.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.14%

-25.93%

+7.79%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.82%

-33.97%

+5.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.91%

-1.36%

-0.55%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.11%

-4.78%

+1.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.22%

2.20%

+0.02%

Volatility

ACWV vs. SPGM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) is 3.15%, while SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM) has a volatility of 4.01%. This indicates that ACWV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SPGM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACWVSPGMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.15%

4.01%

-0.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.25%

11.58%

-5.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.06%

13.78%

-5.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.27%

16.17%

-5.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.29%

17.43%

-5.14%

ACWV vs. SPGM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACWV has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than SPGM's 0.09% 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. SPGM - Dividend Comparison

ACWV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, more than SPGM's 1.80% 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%
SPGM
SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF
1.80%1.89%1.98%2.09%2.37%1.94%1.45%2.46%1.89%2.29%1.87%3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACWV and SPGM have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SPGM has higher volatility (4.01%) compared to ACWV (3.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACWV dropped -28.82% vs SPGM's -33.97%.

On 10-year performance, SPGM leads with 12.68% vs 6.98% for ACWV. On fees, SPGM is cheaper at 0.09% 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, SPGM has performed better with a 12.68% return vs 6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SPGM is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for ACWV.

ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.94%, compared with 1.80% for SPGM.

ACWV tracks MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index, while SPGM tracks MSCI ACWI IMI Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ACWV and 0.09% for SPGM.

SPGM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.85 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 SPGM

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