AGES.L vs. MINV.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AGES.L (iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF) and MINV.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds from iShares tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AGES.L returned 4.88%/yr vs 6.29%/yr for MINV.L. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AGES.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for MINV.L.

Performance

AGES.L vs. MINV.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF (AGES.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (MINV.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AGES.L achieves a 0.19% return, which is significantly lower than MINV.L's 0.86% return.

AGES.L

• 1D: -0.94%
• 1M: -0.00%
• YTD: 0.19%
• 6M: 1.82%
• 1Y: 17.26%
• 3Y*: 10.51%
• 5Y*: 4.88%
• 10Y*: —

MINV.L

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 1.40%
• YTD: 0.86%
• 6M: 0.68%
• 1Y: 2.36%
• 3Y*: 6.71%
• 5Y*: 6.29%
• 10Y*: 7.95%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AGES.L vs. MINV.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AGES.L iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF	0.19%	18.29%	9.75%	2.81%	-3.90%	5.94%	9.34%	15.79%	-8.27%	11.22%
MINV.L iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF	0.86%	3.37%	12.86%	1.50%	1.23%	15.98%	-1.05%	18.84%	3.17%	7.00%

Correlation

The correlation between AGES.L and MINV.L is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2016	0.69

Over the past year, the correlation between AGES.L and MINV.L has dropped to 0.47 - well below their long-term average of 0.69, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

AGES.L vs. MINV.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AGES.L	MINV.L
Healthcare	47.0%	13.6%
Financial Services	43.9%	14.2%
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	5.4%
Real Estate	1.0%	0.7%
Basic Materials	0.2%	1.0%
Technology	0.1%	21.3%
Communication Services	0.1%	11.9%
Consumer Defensive	-	10.8%
Energy	-	4.2%
Industrials	-	9.1%
Utilities	-	7.7%

Return for Risk

AGES.L vs. MINV.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AGES.L

AGES.L Risk / Return Rank: 45
AGES.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
AGES.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
AGES.L Omega Ratio Rank: 40
AGES.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
AGES.L Martin Ratio Rank: 51

MINV.L

MINV.L Risk / Return Rank: 12
MINV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
MINV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
MINV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 11
MINV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
MINV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

AGES.L vs. MINV.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF (AGES.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (MINV.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.

	AGES.L	MINV.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.49	0.30	+1.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.12	0.49	+1.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.05	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.52	0.37	+2.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.64	1.01	+7.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AGES.L vs. MINV.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AGES.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is higher than the MINV.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AGES.L and MINV.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AGES.L	MINV.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.49	0.30	+1.20
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35	0.65	-0.30
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.67	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.83	-0.38

Drawdowns

AGES.L vs. MINV.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGES.L drawdown since its inception was -31.02%, which is greater than MINV.L's maximum drawdown of -20.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGES.L and MINV.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	AGES.L	MINV.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.02%	-20.38%	-10.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.81%	-6.31%	-0.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.04%	-8.47%	-8.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.15%	-10.23%	-8.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-20.38%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.97%	-3.74%	+0.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.90%	-3.74%	-1.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.99%	2.32%	-0.33%

Volatility

AGES.L vs. MINV.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF (AGES.L) has a higher volatility of 2.73% compared to iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (MINV.L) at 2.57%. This indicates that AGES.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MINV.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AGES.L	MINV.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.73%	2.57%	+0.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.92%	5.92%	+3.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.53%	7.92%	+3.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.11%	9.70%	+4.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.49%	11.85%	+3.64%

AGES.L vs. MINV.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AGES.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than MINV.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

AGES.L vs. MINV.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AGES.L nor MINV.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AGES.L and MINV.L in my portfolio?

AGES.L and MINV.L have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AGES.L or MINV.L?

On fees, MINV.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AGES.L or MINV.L?

MINV.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for AGES.L.

What is the main difference between AGES.L and MINV.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for AGES.L and 0.35% for MINV.L.