DFAW vs. ACWV

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

DFAW (Dimensional World Equity ETF) and ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds. DFAW is actively managed, while ACWV is passively managed. Over the past year, DFAW returned 23.87% vs 6.41% for ACWV. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DFAW charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.

Performance

DFAW vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional World Equity ETF (DFAW) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFAW achieves a 12.31% return, which is significantly higher than ACWV's 3.83% return.

DFAW

• 1D: -0.94%
• 1M: 0.13%
• 6M: 8.95%
• YTD: 12.31%
• 1Y: 23.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ACWV

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 0.92%
• 6M: 2.66%
• YTD: 3.83%
• 1Y: 6.41%
• 3Y*: 9.88%
• 5Y*: 5.49%
• 10Y*: 7.02%

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

DFAW vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DFAW Dimensional World Equity ETF	12.31%	20.62%	15.49%	11.44%
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	3.83%	11.04%	11.38%	6.22%

Correlation

The correlation between DFAW and ACWV is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	0.66

The correlation between DFAW and ACWV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFAW vs. ACWV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFAW	ACWV
Technology	27.0%	25.8%
Financial Services	14.8%	13.2%
Industrials	13.4%	8.1%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	5.1%
Healthcare	8.0%	13.0%
Communication Services	7.0%	11.9%
Energy	5.5%	3.7%
Basic Materials	5.0%	1.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	9.8%
Real Estate	2.3%	0.6%
Utilities	2.2%	7.3%

Return for Risk

DFAW vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFAW

DFAW Risk / Return Rank: 73
DFAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
DFAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
DFAW Omega Ratio Rank: 73
DFAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
DFAW Martin Ratio Rank: 78

ACWV

ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 26
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 25
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

DFAW vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional World Equity ETF (DFAW) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV). 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.

	DFAW	ACWV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.88	0.80	+1.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.61	1.18	+1.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.15	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.70	1.01	+1.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.66	2.89	+8.76

DFAW vs. ACWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFAW Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is higher than the ACWV Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFAW and ACWV, 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

DFAW vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFAW drawdown since its inception was -16.93%, smaller than the maximum ACWV drawdown of -28.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFAW and ACWV.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFAW	ACWV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.93%	-28.82%	+11.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.88%	-6.37%	-2.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-7.56%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-18.14%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-28.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.21%	-1.52%	+0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.68%	-3.11%	+1.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.05%	2.22%	-0.17%

Volatility

DFAW vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional World Equity ETF (DFAW) has a higher volatility of 3.99% compared to iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) at 3.17%. This indicates that DFAW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFAW	ACWV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.99%	3.17%	+0.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.42%	6.23%	+4.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.75%	8.07%	+4.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.51%	10.27%	+4.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.51%	12.29%	+2.22%

DFAW vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFAW has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWV's 0.20% 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

DFAW vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison

DFAW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.58%, less than ACWV's 1.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	1.93%	2.09%	2.33%	2.41%	2.18%	1.92%	1.77%	2.54%	2.32%	2.04%	2.56%	2.28%
DFAW Dimensional World Equity ETF	1.58%	1.71%	1.47%	0.42%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFAW and ACWV in my portfolio?

DFAW and ACWV have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFAW or ACWV?

DFAW has higher volatility (3.99%) compared to ACWV (3.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFAW dropped -16.93% vs ACWV's -28.82%.

Which ETF is better, DFAW or ACWV?

On 1-year performance, DFAW leads with 23.87% vs 6.41% for ACWV. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 3.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFAW or ACWV?

Over the 1-year period, DFAW has performed better with a 23.87% return vs 6.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFAW or ACWV?

ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for DFAW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFAW or ACWV?

ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 1.58% for DFAW.

What is the main difference between DFAW and ACWV?

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for DFAW and 0.20% for ACWV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFAW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs 0.80), 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.