PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AGED.L vs. IWDA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AGED.L vs. IWDA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (AGED.L) and iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AGED.L achieves a 11.02% return, which is significantly higher than IWDA.L's 10.17% return.


AGED.L

1D
-0.14%
1M
5.51%
6M
9.54%
YTD
11.02%
1Y
25.89%
3Y*
15.70%
5Y*
6.71%
10Y*

IWDA.L

1D
0.19%
1M
0.21%
6M
9.01%
YTD
10.17%
1Y
22.01%
3Y*
18.87%
5Y*
11.60%
10Y*
12.99%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AGED.L vs. IWDA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
AGED.L
iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
11.02%26.75%7.86%9.03%-14.29%4.61%13.29%19.47%-13.28%22.24%
IWDA.L
iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
10.17%21.03%19.11%24.27%-18.11%22.19%16.06%27.13%-9.01%22.75%

Correlation

The correlation between AGED.L and IWDA.L is 0.68, 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

0.68

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

0.72

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

0.81

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 8, 2016

0.84

The correlation between AGED.L and IWDA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (1 year) to 0.84 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

AGED.L vs. IWDA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AGED.L
AGED.L Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
AGED.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AGED.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
AGED.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
AGED.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
AGED.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank

IWDA.L
IWDA.L Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
IWDA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
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.

AGED.L vs. IWDA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (AGED.L) and iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.L). 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.


AGED.LIWDA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.08

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.21

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.32

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.12

2.64

+0.48

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.36

10.75

+0.60

AGED.L vs. IWDA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AGED.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is comparable to the IWDA.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AGED.L and IWDA.L, 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

AGED.L vs. IWDA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGED.L drawdown since its inception was -40.12%, which is greater than IWDA.L's maximum drawdown of -34.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGED.L and IWDA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AGED.LIWDA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.12%

-34.11%

-6.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.40%

-8.31%

-0.09%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.38%

-16.94%

+0.56%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.68%

-25.88%

-1.80%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.11%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.16%

-0.12%

-1.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.54%

-4.39%

-4.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.31%

2.04%

+0.27%

Volatility

AGED.L vs. IWDA.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (AGED.L) has a higher volatility of 3.77% compared to iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.L) at 2.72%. This indicates that AGED.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWDA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AGED.LIWDA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.77%

2.72%

+1.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.23%

9.80%

+2.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.33%

12.26%

+3.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.78%

15.73%

+2.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.74%

15.78%

+1.96%

AGED.L vs. IWDA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AGED.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than IWDA.L's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

AGED.L vs. IWDA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AGED.L nor IWDA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


AGED.L and IWDA.L have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IWDA.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IWDA.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for AGED.L.

AGED.L tracks Stoxx Global Ageing Population Net USD Index, while IWDA.L tracks MSCI World Index (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.40% for AGED.L and 0.20% for IWDA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AGED.L and IWDA.L

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