BAI vs. ACWI

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

BAI (iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAI is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by iShares, while ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index. BAI is actively managed, while ACWI is passively managed. Over the past year, BAI returned 38.36% vs 23.78% for ACWI. Their 0.78 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BAI charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.

Performance

BAI vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF (BAI) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAI achieves a 24.14% return, which is significantly higher than ACWI's 11.28% return.

BAI

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: -12.04%
• 6M: 19.93%
• YTD: 24.14%
• 1Y: 38.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 34.60%

ACWI

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: 0.18%
• 6M: 8.21%
• YTD: 11.28%
• 1Y: 23.78%
• 3Y*: 18.53%
• 5Y*: 10.82%
• 10Y*: 12.53%
• ALL TIME*: 8.47%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	$420.02M	$465.87M	$510.46M
BAI iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF	$167.58M	$166.96M	$208.62M

BAI vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BAI iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF	24.14%	25.22%	8.89%
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	11.28%	22.41%	-1.28%

Correlation

The correlation between BAI and ACWI is 0.79, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2024	0.78

The correlation between BAI and ACWI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

BAI vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BAI	ACWI
Technology	90.5%	32.7%
Industrials	4.8%	10.8%
Communication Services	3.0%	8.0%
Consumer Cyclical	1.6%	8.7%
Healthcare	0.7%	8.3%
Basic Materials	-	3.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.7%
Energy	-	3.6%
Financial Services	-	16.0%
Real Estate	-	1.6%
Utilities	-	2.4%

Return for Risk

BAI vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BAI

BAI Risk / Return Rank: 35
BAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
BAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
BAI Omega Ratio Rank: 35
BAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
BAI Martin Ratio Rank: 39

ACWI

ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 71
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 69
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 77

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BAI vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF (BAI) 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.

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.

	BAI	ACWI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.82	1.59	-0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.30	2.23	-0.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.29	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.13	2.29	-1.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.19	9.58	-5.38

BAI vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAI Sharpe Ratio is 0.82, which is lower than the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAI 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.

Drawdowns

BAI vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAI drawdown since its inception was -34.09%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAI and ACWI.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAI	ACWI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.09%	-56.00%	+21.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.85%	-9.73%	-21.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.55%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.42%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.53%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.77%	-1.58%	-22.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.42%	-8.55%	+1.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.33%	2.33%	+6.00%

Volatility

BAI vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF (BAI) has a higher volatility of 19.15% compared to iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) at 4.03%. This indicates that BAI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAI	ACWI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.15%	4.03%	+15.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	37.57%	11.71%	+25.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	42.83%	14.01%	+28.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	39.75%	16.23%	+23.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	39.75%	17.06%	+22.69%

BAI vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAI has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAI vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

BAI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, which matches ACWI's 1.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	1.44%	1.55%	1.70%	1.88%	1.79%	1.71%	1.43%	2.33%	2.18%	1.94%	2.19%	2.56%
BAI iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF	1.44%	1.80%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAI and ACWI in my portfolio?

BAI and ACWI have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BAI or ACWI?

BAI has higher volatility (19.15%) compared to ACWI (4.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAI dropped -34.09% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

Which ETF is better, BAI or ACWI?

On 1-year performance, BAI leads with 38.36% vs 23.78% for ACWI. On fees, ACWI is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, ACWI has been the lower-risk option at 4.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAI or ACWI?

Over the 1-year period, BAI has performed better with a 38.36% return vs 23.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAI or ACWI?

ACWI is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for BAI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BAI or ACWI?

BAI and ACWI have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.44%.

What is the main difference between BAI and ACWI?

BAI is categorized as Technology Equities, while ACWI is Global Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for BAI and 0.32% for ACWI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.59 vs 0.82), 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.