HMWO.L vs. VWRP.L
Compare and contrast key facts about HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF (HMWO.L) and Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF (USD) Accumulating (VWRP.L).
HMWO.L and VWRP.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. HMWO.L is a passively managed fund by HSBC that tracks the performance of the MSCI ACWI NR USD. It was launched on Dec 8, 2010. VWRP.L is a passively managed fund by Vanguard that tracks the performance of the MSCI ACWI NR USD. It was launched on Jul 23, 2019. Both HMWO.L and VWRP.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: HMWO.L or VWRP.L.
Key characteristics
| HMWO.L | VWRP.L | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 20.39% | 18.96% |
| 1Y Return | 26.50% | 24.37% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 9.09% | 7.82% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 12.82% | 11.47% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.54 | 2.42 |
| Sortino Ratio | 3.56 | 3.38 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.49 | 1.46 |
| Calmar Ratio | 4.04 | 3.87 |
| Martin Ratio | 18.32 | 17.04 |
| Ulcer Index | 1.40% | 1.38% |
| Daily Std Dev | 10.06% | 9.71% |
| Max Drawdown | -25.48% | -25.10% |
| Current Drawdown | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between HMWO.L and VWRP.L is 0.99, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
HMWO.L vs. VWRP.L - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, HMWO.L achieves a 20.39% return, which is significantly higher than VWRP.L's 18.96% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
HMWO.L vs. VWRP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
HMWO.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than VWRP.L's 0.22% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
HMWO.L vs. VWRP.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF (HMWO.L) and Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF (USD) Accumulating (VWRP.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.
Dividends
HMWO.L vs. VWRP.L - Dividend Comparison
HMWO.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, while VWRP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HMWO.L HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF | 1.42% | 1.60% | 1.75% | 1.27% | 1.55% | 1.97% | 2.11% | 1.91% | 1.84% | 1.86% | 1.72% | 1.95% |
VWRP.L Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF (USD) Accumulating | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
HMWO.L vs. VWRP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HMWO.L drawdown since its inception was -25.48%, roughly equal to the maximum VWRP.L drawdown of -25.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMWO.L and VWRP.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
HMWO.L vs. VWRP.L - Volatility Comparison
HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF (HMWO.L) and Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF (USD) Accumulating (VWRP.L) have volatilities of 2.93% and 2.88%, 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.