PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in SPDR® MSCI Europe Energy UCITS ETF (ENGY.L) and SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ENGY.L is traded in EUR, while ACWD.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the ACWD.L values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ENGY.L achieves a 36.00% return, which is significantly higher than ACWD.L's 12.91% return. Over the past 10 years, ENGY.L has underperformed ACWD.L with an annualized return of 11.49%, while ACWD.L has yielded a comparatively higher 12.54% annualized return.


ENGY.L

1D
1.97%
1M
-0.86%
YTD
36.00%
6M
32.37%
1Y
53.57%
3Y*
17.81%
5Y*
20.20%
10Y*
11.49%

ACWD.L

1D
-0.44%
1M
5.36%
YTD
12.91%
6M
13.86%
1Y
27.13%
3Y*
18.10%
5Y*
12.38%
10Y*
12.54%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ENGY.L
SPDR® MSCI Europe Energy UCITS ETF
36.00%14.96%-5.53%7.23%38.81%36.72%-31.68%12.44%-2.32%4.96%
ACWD.L
SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF
12.91%8.26%25.53%18.60%-13.31%27.65%6.35%28.65%-5.62%8.84%

Correlation

The correlation between ENGY.L and ACWD.L is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.11

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.16

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.26

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.28

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2015

0.26

The correlation between ENGY.L and ACWD.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.28 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ENGY.L
ACWD.L

Energy

99.1%
4.3%

Communication Services

0.7%
9.0%

Financial Services

0.0%
16.5%

Industrials

0.0%
10.9%

Healthcare

0.0%
8.0%

Consumer Defensive

0.0%
4.9%

Technology

0.0%
29.2%

Consumer Cyclical

0.0%
9.3%

Basic Materials

0.0%
3.6%

Utilities

0.0%
2.7%

Real Estate

0.0%
1.7%

Energy

ENGY.L
99.1%
ACWD.L
4.3%

Communication Services

ENGY.L
0.7%
ACWD.L
9.0%

Financial Services

ENGY.L
0.0%
ACWD.L
16.5%

Industrials

ENGY.L
0.0%
ACWD.L
10.9%

Healthcare

ENGY.L
0.0%
ACWD.L
8.0%

Consumer Defensive

ENGY.L
0.0%
ACWD.L
4.9%

Technology

ENGY.L
0.0%
ACWD.L
29.2%

Consumer Cyclical

ENGY.L
0.0%
ACWD.L
9.3%

Basic Materials

ENGY.L
0.0%
ACWD.L
3.6%

Utilities

ENGY.L
0.0%
ACWD.L
2.7%

Real Estate

ENGY.L
0.0%
ACWD.L
1.7%

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

ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ENGY.L
ENGY.L Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
ENGY.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ENGY.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
ENGY.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
ENGY.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
ENGY.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWD.L
ACWD.L Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
ACWD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWD.L 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.

ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR® MSCI Europe Energy UCITS ETF (ENGY.L) and SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.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.


ENGY.LACWD.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.40

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.55

4.26

+0.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.59

16.11

-1.52

ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ENGY.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.38, which is comparable to the ACWD.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ENGY.L and ACWD.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ENGY.LACWD.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.38

2.15

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.88

0.84

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.80

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

0.81

-0.39

Drawdowns

ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ENGY.L drawdown since its inception was -58.56%, which is greater than ACWD.L's maximum drawdown of -33.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ENGY.L and ACWD.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ENGY.LACWD.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.56%

-33.03%

-25.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.73%

-6.34%

-5.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.50%

-20.30%

-6.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.50%

-20.30%

-6.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-58.56%

-33.03%

-25.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.46%

-0.44%

-5.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.00%

-4.40%

-8.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.66%

1.68%

+1.98%

Volatility

ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR® MSCI Europe Energy UCITS ETF (ENGY.L) has a higher volatility of 8.12% compared to SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.L) at 3.50%. This indicates that ENGY.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ENGY.LACWD.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.12%

3.50%

+4.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.19%

9.42%

+9.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.41%

12.60%

+9.81%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.63%

14.80%

+9.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.02%

15.72%

+14.30%

ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ENGY.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWD.L's 0.12% 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

ENGY.L vs. ACWD.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ENGY.L nor ACWD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


ENGY.L and ACWD.L have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ACWD.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ACWD.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for ENGY.L.

ENGY.L is categorized as Energy Equities, while ACWD.L is Global Equities. ENGY.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while ACWD.L tracks MSCI ACWI Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ENGY.L and 0.12% for ACWD.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ENGY.L and ACWD.L

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