PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AQLT vs. KLMT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AQLT vs. KLMT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Global Quality Factor ETF (AQLT) and Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with AQLT having a 12.40% return and KLMT slightly lower at 12.04%.


AQLT

1D
-0.37%
1M
4.34%
YTD
12.40%
6M
12.67%
1Y
29.00%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

KLMT

1D
-0.78%
1M
5.23%
YTD
12.04%
6M
12.88%
1Y
27.86%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AQLT vs. KLMT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
AQLT
iShares MSCI Global Quality Factor ETF
12.40%17.65%-3.14%
KLMT
Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF
12.04%21.31%-3.08%

Correlation

The correlation between AQLT and KLMT is 0.93, 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

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2024

0.94

The correlation between AQLT and KLMT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

AQLT vs. KLMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

AQLT
AQLT Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
AQLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AQLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
AQLT Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
AQLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
AQLT Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

KLMT
KLMT Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
KLMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KLMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
KLMT Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
KLMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
KLMT Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
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.

AQLT vs. KLMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Quality Factor ETF (AQLT) and Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT). 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.


AQLTKLMTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.40

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.73

2.93

-0.21

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.25

12.75

-0.50

AQLT vs. KLMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AQLT Sharpe Ratio is 2.18, which is comparable to the KLMT Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AQLT and KLMT, 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


AQLTKLMTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.18

2.22

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.09

1.28

-0.19

Drawdowns

AQLT vs. KLMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AQLT drawdown since its inception was -16.84%, roughly equal to the maximum KLMT drawdown of -16.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AQLT and KLMT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AQLTKLMTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.84%

-16.87%

+0.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.68%

-9.54%

-1.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.37%

-0.78%

+0.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.32%

-1.91%

-0.41%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.37%

2.19%

+0.18%

Volatility

AQLT vs. KLMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Global Quality Factor ETF (AQLT) is 3.54%, while Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) has a volatility of 3.76%. This indicates that AQLT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KLMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AQLTKLMTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.54%

3.76%

-0.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.82%

10.07%

+0.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.39%

12.61%

+0.78%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.99%

15.85%

+1.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.99%

15.85%

+1.14%

AQLT vs. KLMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

AQLT has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than KLMT's 0.10% 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

AQLT vs. KLMT - Dividend Comparison

AQLT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.93%, less than KLMT's 1.75% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
AQLT
iShares MSCI Global Quality Factor ETF
0.93%1.05%0.02%
KLMT
Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF
1.75%1.95%0.85%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.93, AQLT and KLMT 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.

KLMT has higher volatility (3.76%) compared to AQLT (3.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AQLT dropped -16.84% vs KLMT's -16.87%.

On 1-year performance, AQLT leads with 29.00% vs 27.86% for KLMT. On fees, KLMT is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, AQLT has been the lower-risk option at 3.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, AQLT has performed better with a 29.00% return vs 27.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

KLMT is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for AQLT.

KLMT has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 0.93% for AQLT.

AQLT tracks MSCI ACWI Quality Index (Net), while KLMT tracks MSCI ACWI Select Climate 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for AQLT and 0.10% for KLMT.

KLMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 vs 2.18), 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 AQLT and KLMT

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