PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ESGW.L vs. FWRG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

ESGW.L vs. FWRG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI World Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESGW.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

ESGW.L vs. FWRG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
ESGW.L
Invesco MSCI World Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc
-2.64%20.25%18.23%9.92%
FWRG.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc
-0.40%13.84%20.11%8.08%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESGW.L achieves a -2.64% return, which is significantly lower than FWRG.L's -0.40% return.


ESGW.L

1D
2.78%
1M
-3.89%
YTD
-2.64%
6M
0.92%
1Y
19.50%
3Y*
17.34%
5Y*
10.01%
10Y*

FWRG.L

1D
2.14%
1M
-3.63%
YTD
-0.40%
6M
3.32%
1Y
18.40%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


ESGW.L vs. FWRG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESGW.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than FWRG.L's 0.15% 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%.


Return for Risk

ESGW.L vs. FWRG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESGW.L
ESGW.L Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
ESGW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESGW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESGW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
ESGW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESGW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank

FWRG.L
FWRG.L Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
FWRG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

ESGW.L vs. FWRG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI World Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESGW.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.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.


ESGW.LFWRG.LDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.23

1.32

-0.10

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.75

1.84

-0.08

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.27

-0.02

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.09

2.59

-0.50

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.43

9.85

-1.43

ESGW.L vs. FWRG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESGW.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is comparable to the FWRG.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESGW.L and FWRG.L, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ESGW.LFWRG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.23

1.32

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.75

1.20

-0.45

Correlation

The correlation between ESGW.L and FWRG.L is 0.77, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

ESGW.L vs. FWRG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ESGW.L nor FWRG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

ESGW.L vs. FWRG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESGW.L drawdown since its inception was -32.55%, which is greater than FWRG.L's maximum drawdown of -18.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESGW.L and FWRG.L.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


ESGW.LFWRG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.55%

-18.88%

-13.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.88%

-10.04%

-1.84%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.86%

-4.18%

-1.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.81%

-2.37%

-3.44%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.27%

1.87%

+0.40%

Volatility

ESGW.L vs. FWRG.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI World Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESGW.L) has a higher volatility of 5.40% compared to Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L) at 4.54%. This indicates that ESGW.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FWRG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


ESGW.LFWRG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.40%

4.54%

+0.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.05%

8.25%

+0.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.90%

13.92%

+1.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.84%

12.48%

+3.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.45%

12.48%

+4.97%