PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CWI vs. UMMA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CWI vs. UMMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF (CWI) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWI achieves a 14.50% return, which is significantly lower than UMMA's 32.32% return.


CWI

1D
0.52%
1M
4.54%
YTD
14.50%
6M
16.67%
1Y
31.88%
3Y*
20.12%
5Y*
8.89%
10Y*
9.90%

UMMA

1D
-0.13%
1M
12.11%
YTD
32.32%
6M
35.20%
1Y
51.77%
3Y*
22.81%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CWI vs. UMMA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
CWI
SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF
14.50%32.75%6.27%15.74%-15.47%
UMMA
Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF
32.32%26.65%4.67%18.84%-21.62%

Correlation

The correlation between CWI and UMMA 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 (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 10, 2022

0.90

The correlation between CWI and UMMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

CWI vs. UMMA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CWI
UMMA

Financial Services

17.4%

-

Technology

14.9%
42.9%

Industrials

7.8%
13.5%

Consumer Cyclical

5.8%
8.1%

Healthcare

5.3%
16.6%

Energy

5.0%
2.9%

Basic Materials

4.4%
9.3%

Communication Services

3.2%
0.8%

Consumer Defensive

2.8%
5.6%

Utilities

1.2%

-

Real Estate

0.9%
0.5%

Financial Services

CWI
17.4%
UMMA

-

Technology

CWI
14.9%
UMMA
42.9%

Industrials

CWI
7.8%
UMMA
13.5%

Consumer Cyclical

CWI
5.8%
UMMA
8.1%

Healthcare

CWI
5.3%
UMMA
16.6%

Energy

CWI
5.0%
UMMA
2.9%

Basic Materials

CWI
4.4%
UMMA
9.3%

Communication Services

CWI
3.2%
UMMA
0.8%

Consumer Defensive

CWI
2.8%
UMMA
5.6%

Utilities

CWI
1.2%
UMMA

-

Real Estate

CWI
0.9%
UMMA
0.5%

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

CWI vs. UMMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWI
CWI Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
CWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWI Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
CWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWI Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

UMMA
UMMA Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
UMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
UMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
UMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
UMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

CWI vs. UMMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF (CWI) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA). 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.


CWIUMMADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.50

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.45

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.79

3.48

-0.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.84

13.60

-2.77

CWI vs. UMMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWI Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the UMMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWI and UMMA, 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


CWIUMMADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.09

2.59

-0.50

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.55

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.25

0.58

-0.33

Drawdowns

CWI vs. UMMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWI drawdown since its inception was -60.77%, which is greater than UMMA's maximum drawdown of -34.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWI and UMMA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CWIUMMADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.77%

-34.17%

-26.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.47%

-14.93%

+3.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.85%

-18.73%

+4.88%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.45%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.71%

-0.90%

+0.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.85%

-9.81%

-3.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.95%

3.82%

-0.87%

Volatility

CWI vs. UMMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF (CWI) is 5.74%, while Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA) has a volatility of 7.54%. This indicates that CWI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UMMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CWIUMMADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.74%

7.54%

-1.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.11%

17.26%

-4.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.35%

20.11%

-4.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.24%

20.55%

-4.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.13%

20.55%

-3.42%

CWI vs. UMMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWI has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than UMMA's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

CWI vs. UMMA - Dividend Comparison

CWI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.69%, more than UMMA's 0.93% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CWI
SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF
2.69%2.97%2.89%2.80%3.17%2.65%2.07%3.05%2.81%2.29%2.45%2.62%
UMMA
Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF
0.93%1.02%0.91%1.09%1.77%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, CWI and UMMA 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.

UMMA has higher volatility (7.54%) compared to CWI (5.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CWI dropped -60.77% vs UMMA's -34.17%.

On 3-year performance, UMMA leads with 22.81% vs 20.12% for CWI. On fees, CWI is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, CWI has been the lower-risk option at 5.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, UMMA has performed better with a 22.81% return vs 20.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CWI is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for UMMA.

CWI has the higher dividend yield at 2.69%, compared with 0.93% for UMMA.

CWI tracks MSCI All Country World ex-U.S. Index, while UMMA tracks Dow Jones Islamic Market International Titans 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Wahed. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for CWI and 0.65% for UMMA.

UMMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 2.09), 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 CWI and UMMA

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