PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS (MVOL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FTWG.L is traded in GBp, while MVOL.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the MVOL.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FTWG.L achieves a 11.90% return, which is significantly higher than MVOL.L's 1.00% return.


FTWG.L

1D
-0.39%
1M
5.92%
YTD
11.90%
6M
12.72%
1Y
30.40%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

MVOL.L

1D
0.27%
1M
1.04%
YTD
1.00%
6M
0.86%
1Y
2.46%
3Y*
6.69%
5Y*
6.30%
10Y*
7.95%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
FTWG.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist
11.90%14.12%19.92%7.22%
MVOL.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS
1.00%3.11%13.02%3.66%

Correlation

The correlation between FTWG.L and MVOL.L is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.27

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023

0.46

The correlation between FTWG.L and MVOL.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.27 (1 year) to 0.46 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FTWG.L
MVOL.L

Technology

29.1%
20.1%

Financial Services

16.4%
14.0%

Industrials

11.0%
9.2%

Consumer Cyclical

9.4%
5.6%

Communication Services

8.9%
12.1%

Healthcare

7.6%
13.8%

Consumer Defensive

5.0%
10.9%

Energy

4.3%
4.5%

Basic Materials

3.9%
1.1%

Utilities

2.6%
8.0%

Real Estate

1.9%
0.7%

Technology

FTWG.L
29.1%
MVOL.L
20.1%

Financial Services

FTWG.L
16.4%
MVOL.L
14.0%

Industrials

FTWG.L
11.0%
MVOL.L
9.2%

Consumer Cyclical

FTWG.L
9.4%
MVOL.L
5.6%

Communication Services

FTWG.L
8.9%
MVOL.L
12.1%

Healthcare

FTWG.L
7.6%
MVOL.L
13.8%

Consumer Defensive

FTWG.L
5.0%
MVOL.L
10.9%

Energy

FTWG.L
4.3%
MVOL.L
4.5%

Basic Materials

FTWG.L
3.9%
MVOL.L
1.1%

Utilities

FTWG.L
2.6%
MVOL.L
8.0%

Real Estate

FTWG.L
1.9%
MVOL.L
0.7%

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

FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FTWG.L
FTWG.L Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
FTWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
FTWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

MVOL.L
MVOL.L Risk / Return Rank: 1111
Overall Rank
MVOL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
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.

FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS (MVOL.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.


FTWG.LMVOL.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

1.05

+0.51

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.26

0.42

+3.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.35

1.08

+16.28

FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTWG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.94, which is higher than the MVOL.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTWG.L and MVOL.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FTWG.LMVOL.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.94

0.28

+2.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.59

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.64

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.55

0.79

+0.76

Drawdowns

FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTWG.L drawdown since its inception was -17.78%, smaller than the maximum MVOL.L drawdown of -20.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTWG.L and MVOL.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FTWG.LMVOL.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.78%

-20.24%

+2.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.11%

-5.89%

-1.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.78%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-10.44%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.24%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.39%

-3.49%

+3.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.99%

-3.64%

+1.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.75%

2.27%

-0.52%

Volatility

FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS (MVOL.L) have volatilities of 3.03% and 2.95%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FTWG.LMVOL.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.03%

2.95%

+0.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.59%

6.88%

+0.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.31%

8.81%

+1.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.90%

10.63%

+1.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.90%

12.50%

-0.60%

FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTWG.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than MVOL.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

FTWG.L vs. MVOL.L - Dividend Comparison

FTWG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, while MVOL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023
FTWG.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist
1.21%1.34%1.50%0.70%
MVOL.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FTWG.L and MVOL.L have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, FTWG.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FTWG.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for MVOL.L.

FTWG.L tracks FTSE All-World Index, while MVOL.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FTWG.L and 0.35% for MVOL.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FTWG.L and MVOL.L

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