GLOF vs. QWLD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GLOF (iShares Global Equity Factor ETF) and QWLD (SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLOF is a Global Equities fund tracking the STOXX Global Equity Factor Index, while QWLD is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLOF returned 12.32%/yr vs 11.74%/yr for QWLD. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GLOF charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for QWLD.

Performance

GLOF vs. QWLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Equity Factor ETF (GLOF) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLOF achieves a 10.82% return, which is significantly higher than QWLD's 5.45% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with GLOF having a 12.32% annualized return and QWLD not far behind at 11.74%.

GLOF

• 1D: -2.29%
• 1M: -0.01%
• YTD: 10.82%
• 6M: 10.20%
• 1Y: 26.49%
• 3Y*: 21.52%
• 5Y*: 11.36%
• 10Y*: 12.32%

QWLD

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: -1.39%
• YTD: 5.45%
• 6M: 5.01%
• 1Y: 15.86%
• 3Y*: 15.71%
• 5Y*: 9.75%
• 10Y*: 11.74%

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

GLOF vs. QWLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GLOF iShares Global Equity Factor ETF	10.82%	23.92%	17.49%	22.38%	-16.97%	18.68%	10.00%	23.21%	-13.70%	29.86%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	5.45%	17.93%	14.44%	19.59%	-13.30%	21.57%	10.24%	27.59%	-7.02%	22.44%

Correlation

The correlation between GLOF and QWLD is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 2015	0.78

The correlation between GLOF and QWLD shifts across timeframes, from 0.78 (all time) to 0.93 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GLOF vs. QWLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GLOF	QWLD
Technology	32.2%	25.9%
Financial Services	16.0%	14.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	5.1%
Industrials	8.8%	8.1%
Communication Services	8.4%	9.2%
Healthcare	8.0%	12.7%
Consumer Defensive	5.1%	7.4%
Energy	3.9%	3.3%
Basic Materials	3.2%	2.2%
Utilities	2.8%	3.8%
Real Estate	1.1%	0.5%

Return for Risk

GLOF vs. QWLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLOF

GLOF Risk / Return Rank: 65
GLOF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
GLOF Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
GLOF Omega Ratio Rank: 62
GLOF Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
GLOF Martin Ratio Rank: 72

QWLD

QWLD Risk / Return Rank: 49
QWLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
QWLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
QWLD Omega Ratio Rank: 47
QWLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
QWLD Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

GLOF vs. QWLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Equity Factor ETF (GLOF) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). 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.

	GLOF	QWLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.99	1.62	+0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.76	2.33	+0.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.29	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.94	2.08	+0.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.72	8.96	+3.76

GLOF vs. QWLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLOF Sharpe Ratio is 1.99, which is comparable to the QWLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLOF and QWLD, 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

GLOF vs. QWLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLOF drawdown since its inception was -34.12%, which is greater than QWLD's maximum drawdown of -31.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLOF and QWLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLOF	QWLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.12%	-31.89%	-2.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.05%	-7.66%	-1.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.12%	-12.40%	-3.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.15%	-22.84%	-2.31%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.12%	-31.89%	-2.23%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.85%	-1.77%	-1.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.09%	-3.69%	-2.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.09%	1.77%	+0.32%

Volatility

GLOF vs. QWLD - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Equity Factor ETF (GLOF) has a higher volatility of 5.42% compared to SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) at 2.82%. This indicates that GLOF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QWLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLOF	QWLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.42%	2.82%	+2.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.10%	7.82%	+3.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.37%	9.84%	+3.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.81%	13.54%	+2.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.12%	15.18%	+1.94%

GLOF vs. QWLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLOF has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than QWLD's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLOF vs. QWLD - Dividend Comparison

GLOF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, less than QWLD's 1.85% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GLOF iShares Global Equity Factor ETF	1.61%	1.70%	2.59%	2.51%	2.53%	1.90%	1.73%	2.41%	2.03%	1.94%	1.94%	0.92%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	1.85%	1.85%	1.74%	1.78%	2.02%	1.77%	1.77%	2.13%	2.33%	2.73%	2.22%	3.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLOF and QWLD in my portfolio?

GLOF and QWLD have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GLOF or QWLD?

GLOF has higher volatility (5.42%) compared to QWLD (2.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLOF dropped -34.12% vs QWLD's -31.89%.

Which ETF is better, GLOF or QWLD?

On 10-year performance, GLOF leads with 12.32% vs 11.74% for QWLD. On fees, GLOF is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, QWLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GLOF or QWLD?

Over the 10-year period, GLOF has performed better with a 12.32% return vs 11.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLOF or QWLD?

GLOF is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for QWLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GLOF or QWLD?

QWLD has the higher dividend yield at 1.85%, compared with 1.61% for GLOF.

What is the main difference between GLOF and QWLD?

GLOF is categorized as Global Equities, while QWLD is Large Cap Growth Equities. GLOF tracks STOXX Global Equity Factor Index, while QWLD tracks MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD). They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for GLOF and 0.30% for QWLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLOF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.99 vs 1.62), 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.