GLTY.L vs. ACWD.L
GLTY.L (SPDR Bloomberg UK Gilt UCITS ETF) and ACWD.L (SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLTY.L is a European Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Act UK Cnvt Gilts All Stocks TR GBP, while ACWD.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLTY.L returned 283.96%/yr vs 13.49%/yr for ACWD.L. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. GLTY.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for ACWD.L.
Performance
GLTY.L vs. ACWD.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
GLTY.L is traded in GBP, while ACWD.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the ACWD.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLTY.L achieves a -3.03% return, which is significantly lower than ACWD.L's 11.99% return. Over the past 10 years, GLTY.L has outperformed ACWD.L with an annualized return of 283.96%, while ACWD.L has yielded a comparatively lower 13.49% annualized return.
GLTY.L
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 1.50%
- YTD
- -3.03%
- 6M
- -3.19%
- 1Y
- -1.74%
- 3Y*
- 0.81%
- 5Y*
- 73.61%
- 10Y*
- 283.96%
ACWD.L
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 5.27%
- YTD
- 11.99%
- 6M
- 12.23%
- 1Y
- 30.23%
- 3Y*
- 18.19%
- 5Y*
- 12.52%
- 10Y*
- 13.49%
GLTY.L vs. ACWD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLTY.L SPDR Bloomberg UK Gilt UCITS ETF | -3.03% | 3.10% | -4.48% | 279.86% | 158.03% | 169.82% | 413.90% | 596.36% | 632.13% | 2,267.04% |
ACWD.L SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF | 11.99% | 14.08% | 19.81% | 16.16% | -8.66% | 19.89% | 12.50% | 21.02% | -4.51% | 13.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLTY.L and ACWD.L is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 11, 2012 | -0.05 |
The correlation between GLTY.L and ACWD.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (all time) to 0.26 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
GLTY.L vs. ACWD.L — Risk / Return Rank
GLTY.L
ACWD.L
GLTY.L vs. ACWD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg UK Gilt UCITS ETF (GLTY.L) and SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.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.
| GLTY.L | ACWD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.75 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.75 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.96 | 1.47 | -0.51 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.27 | 4.38 | -4.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.62 | 16.69 | -17.30 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GLTY.L | ACWD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.25 | 2.50 | -2.75 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.54 | 0.88 | -0.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 1.12 | 0.87 | +0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.82 | 0.84 | -0.02 |
Drawdowns
GLTY.L vs. ACWD.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLTY.L drawdown since its inception was -23.61%, smaller than the maximum ACWD.L drawdown of -25.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLTY.L and ACWD.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLTY.L | ACWD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.61% | -25.57% | +1.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.40% | -6.87% | +0.47% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.96% | -18.26% | +10.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.61% | -18.26% | -5.35% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.61% | -25.57% | +1.96% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.40% | -0.33% | -6.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.92% | -3.56% | -0.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.80% | 1.81% | +0.99% |
Volatility
GLTY.L vs. ACWD.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR Bloomberg UK Gilt UCITS ETF (GLTY.L) is 2.79%, while SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.L) has a volatility of 3.71%. This indicates that GLTY.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLTY.L | ACWD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.79% | 3.71% | -0.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.50% | 9.35% | -3.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.94% | 12.02% | -5.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 135.35% | 14.27% | +121.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 251.59% | 15.40% | +236.19% |
GLTY.L vs. ACWD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLTY.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWD.L's 0.12% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
GLTY.L vs. ACWD.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither GLTY.L nor ACWD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACWD.L SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GLTY.L SPDR Bloomberg UK Gilt UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 1.74% | 2.72% | 74.77% | 114.99% | 84.01% | 106.35% | 119.69% | 125.98% | 157.59% | 81.07% | 1.87% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GLTY.L and ACWD.L have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ACWD.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ACWD.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for GLTY.L.
GLTY.L is categorized as European Government Bonds, while ACWD.L is Global Equities. GLTY.L tracks FTSE Act UK Cnvt Gilts All Stocks TR GBP, while ACWD.L tracks MSCI ACWI Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for GLTY.L and 0.12% for ACWD.L.
Find the right allocation for GLTY.L and ACWD.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