CLIM.L vs. PACW.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CLIM.L (Lyxor Green Bond (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc) and PACW.L (Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income) are both exchange-traded funds - CLIM.L is a Global Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Gbl Agg Corp TR USD, while PACW.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the Solactive GBS Global Markets Large & Mid Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CLIM.L returned 3.44% vs 30.29% for PACW.L. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CLIM.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for PACW.L.

Performance

CLIM.L vs. PACW.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Lyxor Green Bond (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (CLIM.L) and Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLIM.L achieves a -0.77% return, which is significantly lower than PACW.L's 11.92% return.

CLIM.L

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 1.07%
• YTD: -0.77%
• 6M: -0.85%
• 1Y: 3.44%
• 3Y*: 2.81%
• 5Y*: -1.57%
• 10Y*: —

PACW.L

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 5.24%
• YTD: 11.92%
• 6M: 12.31%
• 1Y: 30.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CLIM.L vs. PACW.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CLIM.L Lyxor Green Bond (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc	-0.77%	5.02%
PACW.L Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income	11.92%	9.58%

Correlation

The correlation between CLIM.L and PACW.L is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2025	0.11

The correlation between CLIM.L and PACW.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.11 (all time) to 0.27 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CLIM.L vs. PACW.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLIM.L

CLIM.L Risk / Return Rank: 19
CLIM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
CLIM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
CLIM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 19
CLIM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
CLIM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 17

PACW.L

PACW.L Risk / Return Rank: 86
PACW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PACW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
PACW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 89
PACW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
PACW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

CLIM.L vs. PACW.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor Green Bond (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (CLIM.L) and Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.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.

	CLIM.L	PACW.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.67	2.89	-2.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.00	3.95	-2.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.55	-0.44
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.79	4.27	-3.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.78	17.43	-15.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CLIM.L vs. PACW.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLIM.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.67, which is lower than the PACW.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLIM.L and PACW.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

	CLIM.L	PACW.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.67	2.89	-2.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.22	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.02	1.24	-1.26

Drawdowns

CLIM.L vs. PACW.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLIM.L drawdown since its inception was -25.39%, which is greater than PACW.L's maximum drawdown of -17.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLIM.L and PACW.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLIM.L	PACW.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.39%	-17.68%	-7.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.32%	-7.06%	+2.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.66%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.11%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.66%	-0.46%	-16.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.96%	-3.02%	-8.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.93%	1.73%	+0.20%

Volatility

CLIM.L vs. PACW.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Lyxor Green Bond (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (CLIM.L) is 1.62%, while Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L) has a volatility of 2.93%. This indicates that CLIM.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PACW.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CLIM.L	PACW.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.62%	2.93%	-1.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.98%	7.75%	-3.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.10%	10.42%	-5.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.00%	13.91%	-6.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.53%	13.91%	-6.38%

CLIM.L vs. PACW.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLIM.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than PACW.L's 0.07% 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

CLIM.L vs. PACW.L - Dividend Comparison

CLIM.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PACW.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%.

Position	TTM
CLIM.L Lyxor Green Bond (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc	0.00%
PACW.L Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income	1.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CLIM.L and PACW.L in my portfolio?

CLIM.L and PACW.L have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CLIM.L or PACW.L?

On fees, PACW.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CLIM.L or PACW.L?

PACW.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for CLIM.L.

What is the main difference between CLIM.L and PACW.L?

CLIM.L is categorized as Global Corporate Bonds, while PACW.L is Global Equities. CLIM.L tracks Bloomberg Gbl Agg Corp TR USD, while PACW.L tracks Solactive GBS Global Markets Large & Mid Cap Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for CLIM.L and 0.07% for PACW.L.