FNCW.L vs. IMID.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FNCW.L (SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF) and IMID.L (SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI) are both exchange-traded funds - FNCW.L is a Financials Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while IMID.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FNCW.L returned 20.93%/yr vs 17.80%/yr for IMID.L. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FNCW.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for IMID.L.

Performance

FNCW.L vs. IMID.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

FNCW.L is traded in GBP, while IMID.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IMID.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNCW.L achieves a 0.43% return, which is significantly lower than IMID.L's 12.81% return.

FNCW.L

• 1D: 1.91%
• 1M: 2.90%
• YTD: 0.43%
• 6M: 3.68%
• 1Y: 15.52%
• 3Y*: 20.93%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IMID.L

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 5.41%
• YTD: 12.81%
• 6M: 12.92%
• 1Y: 31.35%
• 3Y*: 17.80%
• 5Y*: 12.17%
• 10Y*: —

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

FNCW.L vs. IMID.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FNCW.L SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF	0.43%	20.39%	28.76%	9.92%	-0.09%
IMID.L SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI	12.81%	13.45%	18.35%	15.57%	-6.83%

Correlation

The correlation between FNCW.L and IMID.L is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2022	0.73

The correlation between FNCW.L and IMID.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNCW.L vs. IMID.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNCW.L	IMID.L
Financial Services	98.2%	13.0%
Technology	1.3%	9.6%
Industrials	0.2%	19.5%
Real Estate	0.1%	8.0%
Energy	0.1%	1.6%
Healthcare	0.1%	9.6%
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	9.7%
Utilities	0.1%	3.3%
Basic Materials	-	8.2%
Communication Services	-	3.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	9.7%

Return for Risk

FNCW.L vs. IMID.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNCW.L

FNCW.L Risk / Return Rank: 34
FNCW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FNCW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
FNCW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 33
FNCW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FNCW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 35

IMID.L

IMID.L Risk / Return Rank: 75
IMID.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
IMID.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
IMID.L Omega Ratio Rank: 75
IMID.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
IMID.L Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

FNCW.L vs. IMID.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.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.

	FNCW.L	IMID.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.25	2.58	-1.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.80	3.56	-1.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.49	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.62	4.54	-2.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.15	17.18	-12.03
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FNCW.L vs. IMID.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNCW.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is lower than the IMID.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNCW.L and IMID.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FNCW.L	IMID.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.25	2.58	-1.33
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.85	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	0.57	+0.34

Drawdowns

FNCW.L vs. IMID.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNCW.L drawdown since its inception was -16.31%, smaller than the maximum IMID.L drawdown of -37.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNCW.L and IMID.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNCW.L	IMID.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.31%	-37.84%	+21.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.55%	-6.85%	-2.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.31%	-18.69%	+2.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-18.69%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.13%	-0.29%	-0.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.76%	-3.69%	-0.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.00%	1.82%	+1.18%

Volatility

FNCW.L vs. IMID.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) have volatilities of 3.46% and 3.55%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNCW.L	IMID.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.46%	3.55%	-0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.59%	9.34%	+0.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.41%	12.05%	+0.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.02%	14.26%	+0.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.02%	20.46%	-5.44%

FNCW.L vs. IMID.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNCW.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than IMID.L's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

FNCW.L vs. IMID.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FNCW.L nor IMID.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNCW.L and IMID.L in my portfolio?

FNCW.L and IMID.L have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FNCW.L or IMID.L?

On fees, FNCW.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNCW.L or IMID.L?

FNCW.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for IMID.L.

What is the main difference between FNCW.L and IMID.L?

FNCW.L is categorized as Financials Equities, while IMID.L is Global Equities. FNCW.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while IMID.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for FNCW.L and 0.40% for IMID.L.