PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AOM vs. ACWI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AOM vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AOM achieves a 5.00% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 12.13% return. Over the past 10 years, AOM has underperformed ACWI with an annualized return of 6.22%, while ACWI has yielded a comparatively higher 12.85% annualized return.


AOM

1D
-0.46%
1M
2.13%
YTD
5.00%
6M
5.31%
1Y
14.51%
3Y*
10.87%
5Y*
4.80%
10Y*
6.22%

ACWI

1D
-0.83%
1M
5.28%
YTD
12.13%
6M
12.96%
1Y
29.18%
3Y*
21.15%
5Y*
11.28%
10Y*
12.85%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AOM vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
AOM
iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF
5.00%13.28%7.95%12.38%-14.54%6.93%10.02%15.58%-3.88%11.63%
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
12.13%22.41%17.45%22.27%-18.39%18.66%16.34%26.59%-9.19%24.33%

Correlation

The correlation between AOM and ACWI is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.91

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

0.88

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

0.88

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

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2008

0.86

The correlation between AOM and ACWI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

AOM vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AOM
ACWI

Technology

27.9%
29.4%

Financial Services

16.1%
16.1%

Industrials

11.9%
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

9.5%
9.3%

Communication Services

8.1%
9.0%

Healthcare

8.0%
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

5.0%
5.0%

Energy

4.3%
4.2%

Basic Materials

4.2%
3.7%

Utilities

2.7%
2.6%

Real Estate

2.4%
1.8%

Technology

AOM
27.9%
ACWI
29.4%

Financial Services

AOM
16.1%
ACWI
16.1%

Industrials

AOM
11.9%
ACWI
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

AOM
9.5%
ACWI
9.3%

Communication Services

AOM
8.1%
ACWI
9.0%

Healthcare

AOM
8.0%
ACWI
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

AOM
5.0%
ACWI
5.0%

Energy

AOM
4.3%
ACWI
4.2%

Basic Materials

AOM
4.2%
ACWI
3.7%

Utilities

AOM
2.7%
ACWI
2.6%

Real Estate

AOM
2.4%
ACWI
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

AOM vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

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

AOM
AOM Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
AOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
AOM Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
AOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
AOM Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWI
ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

AOM vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.


AOMACWIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.41

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.85

3.01

-0.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.45

13.53

-1.08

AOM vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AOM Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is comparable to the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AOM and ACWI, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AOMACWIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.23

2.29

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.59

0.71

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.79

0.75

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.69

0.43

+0.27

Drawdowns

AOM vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AOM drawdown since its inception was -19.96%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOM and ACWI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AOMACWIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.96%

-56.00%

+36.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.11%

-9.73%

+4.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.85%

-16.55%

+9.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.96%

-26.42%

+6.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-19.96%

-33.53%

+13.57%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.46%

-0.83%

+0.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.70%

-8.61%

+5.91%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.17%

2.16%

-0.99%

Volatility

AOM vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) is 2.17%, while iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) has a volatility of 3.93%. This indicates that AOM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AOMACWIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.17%

3.93%

-1.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.22%

10.29%

-5.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.55%

12.78%

-6.23%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.14%

16.05%

-7.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.93%

17.11%

-9.18%

AOM vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

AOM has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.


Dividends

AOM vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

AOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.98%, more than ACWI's 1.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
1.38%1.55%1.70%1.88%1.79%1.71%1.43%2.33%2.18%1.94%2.19%2.56%
AOM
iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF
2.98%2.98%3.10%2.79%2.27%1.56%2.02%2.66%2.53%3.31%2.14%1.98%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, AOM and ACWI move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

ACWI has higher volatility (3.93%) compared to AOM (2.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AOM dropped -19.96% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

On 10-year performance, ACWI leads with 12.85% vs 6.22% for AOM. On fees, AOM is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, AOM has been the lower-risk option at 2.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 12.85% return vs 6.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AOM is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.

AOM has the higher dividend yield at 2.98%, compared with 1.38% for ACWI.

AOM is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while ACWI is Global Equities. AOM tracks S&P Target Risk Moderate, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AOM and 0.32% for ACWI.

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 2.23), 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 AOM and ACWI

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