DFAW vs. KLMT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DFAW (Dimensional World Equity ETF) and KLMT (Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF) are both Global Equities funds. DFAW is actively managed, while KLMT is passively managed. Over the past year, DFAW returned 30.13% vs 27.86% for KLMT. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DFAW charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for KLMT.

Performance

DFAW vs. KLMT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with DFAW having a 12.61% return and KLMT slightly lower at 12.04%.

DFAW

• 1D: -0.70%
• 1M: 4.36%
• YTD: 12.61%
• 6M: 13.91%
• 1Y: 30.13%
• 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)

DFAW vs. KLMT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
DFAW Dimensional World Equity ETF	12.61%	20.62%	5.89%
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	12.04%	21.31%	4.94%

Correlation

The correlation between DFAW 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 Jun 27, 2024	0.95

The correlation between DFAW and KLMT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFAW vs. KLMT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFAW	KLMT
Technology	24.8%	30.0%
Financial Services	15.5%	16.9%
Industrials	13.6%	10.2%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	9.2%
Healthcare	7.9%	8.0%
Communication Services	7.3%	9.6%
Energy	6.0%	4.1%
Basic Materials	5.0%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	4.6%
Real Estate	2.4%	2.7%
Utilities	2.3%	2.0%

Return for Risk

DFAW vs. KLMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFAW

DFAW Risk / Return Rank: 74
DFAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
DFAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
DFAW Omega Ratio Rank: 75
DFAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
DFAW Martin Ratio Rank: 77

KLMT

KLMT Risk / Return Rank: 67
KLMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
KLMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
KLMT Omega Ratio Rank: 67
KLMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
KLMT Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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. KLMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional World Equity ETF (DFAW) 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.

	DFAW	KLMT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	2.22	+0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.49	3.10	+0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.40	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.41	2.93	+0.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.09	12.75	+2.35
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DFAW vs. KLMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFAW Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the KLMT Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFAW 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DFAW	KLMT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.52	2.22	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.62	1.28	+0.34

Drawdowns

DFAW vs. KLMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFAW drawdown since its inception was -16.93%, roughly equal to the maximum KLMT drawdown of -16.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFAW and KLMT.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFAW	KLMT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.93%	-16.87%	-0.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.88%	-9.54%	+0.66%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.70%	-0.78%	+0.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.70%	-1.91%	+0.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.00%	2.19%	-0.19%

Volatility

DFAW vs. KLMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional World Equity ETF (DFAW) is 3.35%, while Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) has a volatility of 3.76%. This indicates that DFAW 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.

Volatility by Period

	DFAW	KLMT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.35%	3.76%	-0.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.39%	10.07%	-0.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.03%	12.61%	-0.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.46%	15.85%	-1.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.46%	15.85%	-1.39%

DFAW vs. KLMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFAW has a 0.25% 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

DFAW vs. KLMT - Dividend Comparison

DFAW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, less than KLMT's 1.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
DFAW Dimensional World Equity ETF	1.55%	1.71%	1.47%	0.42%
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	1.75%	1.95%	0.85%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFAW and KLMT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, DFAW 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.

Which is riskier, DFAW or KLMT?

KLMT has higher volatility (3.76%) compared to DFAW (3.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFAW dropped -16.93% vs KLMT's -16.87%.

Which ETF is better, DFAW or KLMT?

On 1-year performance, DFAW leads with 30.13% vs 27.86% for KLMT. On fees, KLMT is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, DFAW has been the lower-risk option at 3.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFAW or KLMT?

Over the 1-year period, DFAW has performed better with a 30.13% return vs 27.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFAW or KLMT?

KLMT is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for DFAW.

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

KLMT has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 1.55% for DFAW.

What is the main difference between DFAW and KLMT?

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for DFAW and 0.10% for KLMT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFAW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.22), 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.