FWRG.L vs. PWC
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L) and Invesco Dynamic Market ETF (PWC).
FWRG.L and PWC are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FWRG.L is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the FTSE All-World Index. It was launched on Feb 20, 2024. PWC is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the Dynamic Market Intellidex Index. It was launched on May 1, 2003. Both FWRG.L and PWC are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
FWRG.L vs. PWC - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
FWRG.L vs. PWC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FWRG.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc | -2.48% | 13.84% | 20.11% | 8.08% |
PWC Invesco Dynamic Market ETF | 2.60% | 6.15% | 17.46% | 7.49% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FWRG.L achieves a -2.48% return, which is significantly lower than PWC's 2.60% return.
FWRG.L
- 1D
- 0.33%
- 1M
- -6.18%
- YTD
- -2.48%
- 6M
- 1.64%
- 1Y
- 17.35%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PWC
- 1D
- 1.17%
- 1M
- -5.11%
- YTD
- 2.60%
- 6M
- 2.73%
- 1Y
- 6.46%
- 3Y*
- 12.67%
- 5Y*
- 6.65%
- 10Y*
- 9.15%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FWRG.L vs. PWC - Expense Ratio Comparison
FWRG.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than PWC's 0.60% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
FWRG.L vs. PWC — Risk / Return Rank
FWRG.L
PWC
FWRG.L vs. PWC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L) and Invesco Dynamic Market ETF (PWC). 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.
| FWRG.L | PWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.25 | 0.46 | +0.80 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.74 | 0.74 | +1.01 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.10 | +0.16 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.59 | 0.70 | +0.88 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.64 | 3.23 | +3.40 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FWRG.L | PWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.25 | 0.46 | +0.80 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.41 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.49 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.14 | 0.11 | +1.03 |
Correlation
The correlation between FWRG.L and PWC is 0.29, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Dividends
FWRG.L vs. PWC - Dividend Comparison
FWRG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PWC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.73%.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FWRG.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PWC Invesco Dynamic Market ETF | 1.73% | 1.77% | 1.58% | 1.67% | 1.51% | 0.56% | 1.09% | 0.95% | 1.44% | 1.75% | 1.35% | 1.02% |
Drawdowns
FWRG.L vs. PWC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FWRG.L drawdown since its inception was -18.88%, smaller than the maximum PWC drawdown of -78.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FWRG.L and PWC.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| FWRG.L | PWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.88% | -78.13% | +59.25% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.08% | -11.26% | +1.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.58% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -39.45% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.18% | -5.36% | -0.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.37% | -36.46% | +34.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.40% | 2.45% | -0.05% |
Volatility
FWRG.L vs. PWC - Volatility Comparison
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L) has a higher volatility of 4.24% compared to Invesco Dynamic Market ETF (PWC) at 3.07%. This indicates that FWRG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PWC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| FWRG.L | PWC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.24% | 3.07% | +1.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.00% | 7.37% | +0.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.80% | 14.30% | -0.50% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.43% | 16.29% | -3.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.43% | 18.84% | -6.41% |