IBGM.L vs. ACWI.L
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Euro Government Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR (Dist) (IBGM.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF (ACWI.L).
IBGM.L and ACWI.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IBGM.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg Euro Agg Govt TR EUR. It was launched on Mar 18, 2010. ACWI.L is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the MSCI ACWI NR USD. It was launched on May 13, 2011. Both IBGM.L and ACWI.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: IBGM.L or ACWI.L.
Key characteristics
| IBGM.L | ACWI.L | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | -4.02% | 18.85% |
| 1Y Return | 1.73% | 25.52% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -5.51% | 7.77% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | -3.17% | 11.47% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 0.83% | 11.61% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.29 | 2.52 |
| Sortino Ratio | 0.46 | 3.51 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.05 | 1.47 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.08 | 3.84 |
| Martin Ratio | 0.52 | 17.04 |
| Ulcer Index | 3.88% | 1.47% |
| Daily Std Dev | 7.08% | 9.90% |
| Max Drawdown | -27.44% | -41.43% |
| Current Drawdown | -23.43% | 0.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBGM.L and ACWI.L is 0.20, 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.
Performance
IBGM.L vs. ACWI.L - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, IBGM.L achieves a -4.02% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI.L's 18.85% return. Over the past 10 years, IBGM.L has underperformed ACWI.L with an annualized return of 0.83%, while ACWI.L has yielded a comparatively higher 11.61% annualized 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.
IBGM.L vs. ACWI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBGM.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI.L's 0.40% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
IBGM.L vs. ACWI.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Euro Government Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR (Dist) (IBGM.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF (ACWI.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
IBGM.L vs. ACWI.L - Dividend Comparison
IBGM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.62%, while ACWI.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBGM.L iShares Euro Government Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR (Dist) | 2.62% | 79.03% | 13.18% | 0.00% | 8.74% | 63.75% | 74.12% | 74.41% | 77.14% | 106.84% | 90.53% | 2.06% |
ACWI.L SPDR MSCI ACWI 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% |
Drawdowns
IBGM.L vs. ACWI.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBGM.L drawdown since its inception was -27.44%, smaller than the maximum ACWI.L drawdown of -41.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBGM.L and ACWI.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
IBGM.L vs. ACWI.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Euro Government Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR (Dist) (IBGM.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF (ACWI.L) have volatilities of 2.82% and 2.83%, 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.