IDME vs. ACWV

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

IDME (Aptus International Drawdown Managed Equity ETF) and ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds. IDME is actively managed, while ACWV is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IDME returned 15.95%/yr vs 9.88%/yr for ACWV. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IDME charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.

Performance

IDME vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Aptus International Drawdown Managed Equity ETF (IDME) 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, IDME achieves a 14.07% return, which is significantly higher than ACWV's 3.83% return.

IDME

• 1D: -1.71%
• 1M: -1.16%
• 6M: 9.74%
• YTD: 14.07%
• 1Y: 27.23%
• 3Y*: 15.95%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ACWV

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 0.92%
• 6M: 2.66%
• YTD: 3.83%
• 1Y: 6.41%
• 3Y*: 9.88%
• 5Y*: 5.49%
• 10Y*: 7.02%

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

IDME vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IDME Aptus International Drawdown Managed Equity ETF	14.07%	27.53%	6.12%	9.07%	-19.79%	-1.16%
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	3.83%	11.04%	11.38%	8.23%	-10.36%	5.11%

Correlation

The correlation between IDME and ACWV is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.54
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2021	0.68

The correlation between IDME and ACWV shifts across timeframes, from 0.54 (1 year) to 0.68 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IDME vs. ACWV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IDME	ACWV
Financial Services	19.2%	13.2%
Industrials	13.8%	8.1%
Consumer Cyclical	11.1%	5.1%
Technology	9.9%	25.8%
Healthcare	9.6%	13.0%
Consumer Defensive	8.4%	9.8%
Basic Materials	8.1%	1.5%
Energy	5.6%	3.7%
Communication Services	5.4%	11.9%
Real Estate	3.2%	0.6%
Utilities	3.0%	7.3%

Return for Risk

IDME vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank

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

IDME

IDME Risk / Return Rank: 63
IDME Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
IDME Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
IDME Omega Ratio Rank: 64
IDME Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
IDME Martin Ratio Rank: 65

ACWV

ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 26
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 25
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

IDME vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aptus International Drawdown Managed Equity ETF (IDME) 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.

	IDME	ACWV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.65	0.80	+0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.31	1.18	+1.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.15	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.39	1.01	+1.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.23	2.89	+6.34

IDME vs. ACWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IDME Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is higher than the ACWV Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IDME 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

IDME vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IDME drawdown since its inception was -29.20%, roughly equal to the maximum ACWV drawdown of -28.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IDME and ACWV.

Drawdown Indicators

	IDME	ACWV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.20%	-28.82%	-0.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.46%	-6.37%	-5.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.88%	-7.56%	-5.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-18.14%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-28.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.92%	-1.52%	-1.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.97%	-3.11%	-7.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.96%	2.22%	+0.74%

Volatility

IDME vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison

Aptus International Drawdown Managed Equity ETF (IDME) has a higher volatility of 5.53% compared to iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) at 3.17%. This indicates that IDME'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

	IDME	ACWV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.53%	3.17%	+2.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.37%	6.23%	+8.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.60%	8.07%	+8.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.80%	10.27%	+4.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.80%	12.29%	+2.51%

IDME vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison

IDME has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWV's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

IDME vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison

IDME's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.64%, more than ACWV's 1.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	1.93%	2.09%	2.33%	2.41%	2.18%	1.92%	1.77%	2.54%	2.32%	2.04%	2.56%	2.28%
IDME Aptus International Drawdown Managed Equity ETF	4.64%	4.90%	5.64%	3.71%	2.62%	1.38%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IDME and ACWV in my portfolio?

IDME and ACWV have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IDME or ACWV?

IDME has higher volatility (5.53%) compared to ACWV (3.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IDME dropped -29.20% vs ACWV's -28.82%.

Which ETF is better, IDME or ACWV?

On 3-year performance, IDME leads with 15.95% vs 9.88% for ACWV. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 3.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IDME or ACWV?

Over the 3-year period, IDME has performed better with a 15.95% return vs 9.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IDME or ACWV?

ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for IDME.

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

IDME has the higher dividend yield at 4.64%, compared with 1.93% for ACWV.

What is the main difference between IDME and ACWV?

They also come from different issuers: Aptus Capital Advisors and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for IDME and 0.20% for ACWV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IDME currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.65 vs 0.80), 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.