FICS vs. ACWV

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

FICS (First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF) and ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds - FICS tracks the The International Developed Capital Strength Index while ACWV tracks the MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FICS returned 5.61%/yr vs 5.39%/yr for ACWV. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FICS charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.

Performance

FICS vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF (FICS) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FICS achieves a 6.13% return, which is significantly higher than ACWV's 3.42% return.

FICS

• 1D: 0.35%
• 1M: 2.56%
• 6M: 5.76%
• YTD: 6.13%
• 1Y: 8.99%
• 3Y*: 10.77%
• 5Y*: 5.61%
• 10Y*: —

ACWV

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: 0.53%
• 6M: 2.85%
• YTD: 3.42%
• 1Y: 5.53%
• 3Y*: 9.73%
• 5Y*: 5.39%
• 10Y*: 6.98%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FICS vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FICS First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF	6.13%	20.44%	2.59%	18.07%	-19.47%	19.78%	2.47%
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	3.42%	11.04%	11.38%	8.23%	-10.36%	13.97%	1.19%

Correlation

The correlation between FICS and ACWV is 0.72, 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	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.72
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2020	0.72

The correlation between FICS and ACWV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

FICS vs. ACWV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FICS	ACWV
Financial Services	28.3%	13.2%
Industrials	27.9%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	13.8%	9.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	5.1%
Healthcare	9.9%	13.0%
Basic Materials	4.2%	1.5%
Communication Services	3.8%	11.9%
Energy	3.1%	3.7%
Technology	1.9%	25.8%
Real Estate	-	0.6%
Utilities	-	7.3%

Return for Risk

FICS vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FICS

FICS Risk / Return Rank: 23
FICS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
FICS Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
FICS Omega Ratio Rank: 22
FICS Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
FICS Martin Ratio Rank: 24

ACWV

ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 23
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 21
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

FICS vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF (FICS) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV). 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.

	FICS	ACWV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.68	0.69	-0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.07	1.03	+0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.13	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.87	0.87	0.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.49	2.49	0.00

FICS vs. ACWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FICS Sharpe Ratio is 0.68, which is comparable to the ACWV Sharpe Ratio of 0.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FICS and ACWV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FICS vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FICS drawdown since its inception was -29.16%, roughly equal to the maximum ACWV drawdown of -28.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FICS and ACWV.

Drawdown Indicators

	FICS	ACWV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.16%	-28.82%	-0.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.32%	-6.37%	-3.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.41%	-7.56%	-3.85%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.16%	-18.14%	-11.02%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-28.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.02%	-1.91%	+0.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.09%	-3.11%	-3.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.62%	2.22%	+1.40%

Volatility

FICS vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF (FICS) is 2.54%, while iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) has a volatility of 3.15%. This indicates that FICS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FICS	ACWV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.54%	3.15%	-0.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.06%	6.25%	+4.81%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.21%	8.06%	+5.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.23%	10.27%	+6.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.84%	12.29%	+4.55%

FICS vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FICS has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWV's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

FICS vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison

FICS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, less than ACWV's 1.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	1.94%	2.09%	2.33%	2.41%	2.18%	1.92%	1.77%	2.54%	2.32%	2.04%	2.56%	2.28%
FICS First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF	1.83%	1.85%	2.01%	1.02%	1.89%	1.26%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FICS and ACWV in my portfolio?

FICS and ACWV have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FICS or ACWV?

ACWV has higher volatility (3.15%) compared to FICS (2.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FICS dropped -29.16% vs ACWV's -28.82%.

Which ETF is better, FICS or ACWV?

On 5-year performance, FICS leads with 5.61% vs 5.39% for ACWV. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, FICS has been the lower-risk option at 2.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FICS or ACWV?

Over the 5-year period, FICS has performed better with a 5.61% return vs 5.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FICS or ACWV?

ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FICS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FICS or ACWV?

ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.94%, compared with 1.83% for FICS.

What is the main difference between FICS and ACWV?

FICS tracks The International Developed Capital Strength Index, while ACWV tracks MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for FICS and 0.20% for ACWV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACWV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.69 vs 0.68), 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.