ESMV vs. GXLC
ESMV (iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF) and GXLC (Global X U.S. 500 ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - ESMV tracks the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Extended ESG Reduced Carbon Target Index - Benchmark TR Gross while GXLC tracks the Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ESMV charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.02%/yr for GXLC.
Performance
ESMV vs. GXLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ESMV achieves a 4.06% return, which is significantly lower than GXLC's 9.76% return.
ESMV
- 1D
- -0.22%
- 1M
- -0.61%
- YTD
- 4.06%
- 6M
- 3.40%
- 1Y
- 6.29%
- 3Y*
- 10.45%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GXLC
- 1D
- -0.47%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- 9.76%
- 6M
- 9.33%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ESMV vs. GXLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ESMV iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF | 4.06% | 0.29% |
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF | 9.76% | 3.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between ESMV and GXLC is 0.66, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025 | 0.66 |
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
ESMV vs. GXLC — Risk / Return Rank
ESMV
GXLC
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ESMV vs. GXLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF (ESMV) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). 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.
| ESMV | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.12 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.90 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.75 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ESMV vs. GXLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ESMV drawdown since its inception was -19.77%, which is greater than GXLC's maximum drawdown of -9.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESMV and GXLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ESMV | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.77% | -9.08% | -10.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.01% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.16% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.93% | -1.76% | -0.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.28% | -1.53% | -3.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.29% | — | — |
Volatility
ESMV vs. GXLC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ESMV | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.82% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.53% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.16% | 13.79% | -3.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.20% | 13.79% | -0.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.20% | 13.79% | -0.59% |
ESMV vs. GXLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
ESMV has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than GXLC's 0.02% 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
ESMV vs. GXLC - Dividend Comparison
ESMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, more than GXLC's 0.64% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ESMV iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF | 1.55% | 1.56% | 1.71% | 1.75% | 1.66% | 0.24% |
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF | 0.64% | 0.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ESMV and GXLC have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GXLC is cheaper at 0.02% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GXLC is cheaper with a 0.02% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for ESMV.
ESMV has the higher dividend yield at 1.55%, compared with 0.64% for GXLC.
ESMV tracks MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Extended ESG Reduced Carbon Target Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while GXLC tracks Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ESMV and 0.02% for GXLC.
Find the right allocation for ESMV and GXLC
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