PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EUSA vs. ACWI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EUSA vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF (EUSA) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EUSA achieves a 10.04% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 12.47% return. Over the past 10 years, EUSA has underperformed ACWI with an annualized return of 11.57%, while ACWI has yielded a comparatively higher 12.82% annualized return.


EUSA

1D
0.81%
1M
3.88%
YTD
10.04%
6M
10.00%
1Y
19.17%
3Y*
16.37%
5Y*
7.90%
10Y*
11.57%

ACWI

1D
0.30%
1M
4.45%
YTD
12.47%
6M
13.07%
1Y
29.24%
3Y*
21.38%
5Y*
11.35%
10Y*
12.82%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EUSA vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EUSA
iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF
10.04%10.24%14.64%17.72%-17.13%25.60%15.03%30.56%-8.58%19.02%
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
12.47%22.41%17.45%22.27%-18.39%18.66%16.34%26.59%-9.19%24.33%

Correlation

The correlation between EUSA and ACWI is 0.79, 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

0.79

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

0.85

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

0.90

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

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2010

0.80

The correlation between EUSA and ACWI shifts across timeframes, from 0.79 (1 year) to 0.90 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EUSA vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EUSA
ACWI

Technology

21.3%
29.4%

Industrials

14.7%
10.9%

Financial Services

14.4%
16.1%

Healthcare

10.1%
8.1%

Consumer Cyclical

9.7%
9.3%

Utilities

5.6%
2.6%

Real Estate

5.5%
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

5.2%
5.0%

Communication Services

4.8%
9.0%

Energy

4.6%
4.2%

Basic Materials

4.1%
3.7%

Technology

EUSA
21.3%
ACWI
29.4%

Industrials

EUSA
14.7%
ACWI
10.9%

Financial Services

EUSA
14.4%
ACWI
16.1%

Healthcare

EUSA
10.1%
ACWI
8.1%

Consumer Cyclical

EUSA
9.7%
ACWI
9.3%

Utilities

EUSA
5.6%
ACWI
2.6%

Real Estate

EUSA
5.5%
ACWI
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

EUSA
5.2%
ACWI
5.0%

Communication Services

EUSA
4.8%
ACWI
9.0%

Energy

EUSA
4.6%
ACWI
4.2%

Basic Materials

EUSA
4.1%
ACWI
3.7%

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

EUSA vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

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

EUSA
EUSA Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
EUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
EUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
EUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
EUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWI
ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWI 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.

EUSA vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF (EUSA) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.


EUSAACWIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.42

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.46

3.02

-0.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.76

13.55

-3.80

EUSA vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EUSA Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is comparable to the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EUSA and ACWI, 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


EUSAACWIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.63

2.30

-0.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

0.71

-0.24

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

0.75

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.71

0.43

+0.28

Drawdowns

EUSA vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EUSA drawdown since its inception was -39.16%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EUSA and ACWI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EUSAACWIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.16%

-56.00%

+16.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.82%

-9.73%

+1.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.20%

-16.55%

-1.65%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.24%

-26.42%

+1.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.16%

-33.53%

-5.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.53%

+0.53%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.59%

-8.61%

+4.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.97%

2.16%

-0.19%

Volatility

EUSA vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF (EUSA) is 2.93%, while iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) has a volatility of 3.83%. This indicates that EUSA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EUSAACWIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.93%

3.83%

-0.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.75%

10.30%

-1.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.80%

12.79%

-0.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.95%

16.05%

+0.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.34%

17.11%

+1.23%

EUSA vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

EUSA has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.


Dividends

EUSA vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

EUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, more than ACWI's 1.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
1.38%1.55%1.70%1.88%1.79%1.71%1.43%2.33%2.18%1.94%2.19%2.56%
EUSA
iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF
1.51%1.63%1.47%1.53%1.73%1.23%1.45%1.49%2.01%1.50%1.59%2.21%

Frequently Asked Questions


EUSA and ACWI have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ACWI has higher volatility (3.83%) compared to EUSA (2.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EUSA dropped -39.16% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

On 10-year performance, ACWI leads with 12.82% vs 11.57% for EUSA. On fees, EUSA is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, EUSA has been the lower-risk option at 2.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 12.82% return vs 11.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EUSA is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.

EUSA has the higher dividend yield at 1.51%, compared with 1.38% for ACWI.

EUSA is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while ACWI is Global Equities. EUSA tracks MSCI USA Equal Weighted Index, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for EUSA and 0.32% for ACWI.

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.63), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EUSA and ACWI

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