GVAL vs. ACWV

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

GVAL (Cambria Global Value ETF) and ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds. GVAL is actively managed, while ACWV is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GVAL returned 11.17%/yr vs 6.98%/yr for ACWV. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GVAL charges 0.64%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.

Performance

GVAL vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GVAL achieves a 18.91% return, which is significantly higher than ACWV's 3.42% return. Over the past 10 years, GVAL has outperformed ACWV with an annualized return of 11.17%, while ACWV has yielded a comparatively lower 6.98% annualized return.

GVAL

• 1D: 1.26%
• 1M: 1.95%
• 6M: 13.74%
• YTD: 18.91%
• 1Y: 38.32%
• 3Y*: 25.96%
• 5Y*: 15.17%
• 10Y*: 11.17%

ACWV

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: 0.53%
• 6M: 2.85%
• YTD: 3.42%
• 1Y: 5.53%
• 3Y*: 9.73%
• 5Y*: 5.39%
• 10Y*: 6.98%

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

GVAL vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GVAL Cambria Global Value ETF	18.91%	55.87%	2.59%	13.30%	-7.98%	10.70%	-8.51%	17.24%	-14.30%	29.50%
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	3.42%	11.04%	11.38%	8.23%	-10.36%	13.97%	3.04%	21.04%	-1.42%	18.57%

Correlation

The correlation between GVAL and ACWV is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 12, 2014	0.63

The correlation between GVAL and ACWV shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.63 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GVAL vs. ACWV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GVAL	ACWV
Financial Services	18.4%	13.2%
Basic Materials	8.7%	1.5%
Technology	8.2%	25.8%
Energy	6.9%	3.7%
Real Estate	6.4%	0.6%
Utilities	5.0%	7.3%
Industrials	4.6%	8.1%
Communication Services	4.3%	11.9%
Consumer Cyclical	3.1%	5.1%
Consumer Defensive	1.9%	9.8%
Healthcare	-	13.0%

Return for Risk

GVAL vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank

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

GVAL

GVAL Risk / Return Rank: 86
GVAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
GVAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GVAL Omega Ratio Rank: 88
GVAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
GVAL Martin Ratio Rank: 81

ACWV

ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 23
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 21
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

GVAL vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV). 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.

	GVAL	ACWV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.45	0.69	+1.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.28	1.03	+2.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.13	+0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.35	0.87	+2.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.39	2.49	+9.89

GVAL vs. ACWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GVAL Sharpe Ratio is 2.45, which is higher than the ACWV Sharpe Ratio of 0.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GVAL and ACWV, 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

GVAL vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GVAL drawdown since its inception was -46.82%, which is greater than ACWV's maximum drawdown of -28.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GVAL and ACWV.

Drawdown Indicators

	GVAL	ACWV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.82%	-28.82%	-18.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.50%	-6.37%	-5.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.72%	-7.56%	-8.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.83%	-18.14%	-12.69%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.82%	-28.82%	-18.00%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.05%	-1.91%	+0.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.77%	-3.11%	-10.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	2.22%	+0.88%

Volatility

GVAL vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison

Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL) has a higher volatility of 5.51% compared to iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) at 3.15%. This indicates that GVAL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GVAL	ACWV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.51%	3.15%	+2.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.09%	6.25%	+7.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.71%	8.06%	+7.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.62%	10.27%	+8.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.98%	12.29%	+6.69%

GVAL vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison

GVAL has a 0.64% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWV's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

GVAL vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison

GVAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, more than ACWV's 1.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	1.94%	2.09%	2.33%	2.41%	2.18%	1.92%	1.77%	2.54%	2.32%	2.04%	2.56%	2.28%
GVAL Cambria Global Value ETF	2.40%	2.93%	4.75%	6.12%	5.05%	2.97%	1.90%	2.84%	4.65%	2.00%	2.54%	2.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GVAL and ACWV in my portfolio?

GVAL and ACWV have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GVAL or ACWV?

GVAL has higher volatility (5.51%) compared to ACWV (3.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GVAL dropped -46.82% vs ACWV's -28.82%.

Which ETF is better, GVAL or ACWV?

On 10-year performance, GVAL leads with 11.17% vs 6.98% for ACWV. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 3.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GVAL or ACWV?

Over the 10-year period, GVAL has performed better with a 11.17% return vs 6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GVAL or ACWV?

ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.64% for GVAL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GVAL or ACWV?

GVAL has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 1.94% for ACWV.

What is the main difference between GVAL and ACWV?

They also come from different issuers: Cambria and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.64% for GVAL and 0.20% for ACWV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GVAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 0.69), 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.