IFLR vs. NZAC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IFLR (Innovator International Developed Managed Floor ETF) and NZAC (SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF) are both Global Equities funds. IFLR is actively managed, while NZAC is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IFLR charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for NZAC.

Performance

IFLR vs. NZAC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator International Developed Managed Floor ETF (IFLR) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFLR achieves a 4.93% return, which is significantly lower than NZAC's 8.83% return.

IFLR

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: 3.67%
• YTD: 4.93%
• 6M: 7.25%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NZAC

• 1D: -0.82%
• 1M: 4.49%
• YTD: 8.83%
• 6M: 9.51%
• 1Y: 24.74%
• 3Y*: 19.06%
• 5Y*: 9.88%
• 10Y*: 12.16%

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

IFLR vs. NZAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IFLR Innovator International Developed Managed Floor ETF	4.93%	4.20%
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	8.83%	5.14%

Correlation

The correlation between IFLR and NZAC is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2025	0.80

IFLR vs. NZAC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IFLR	NZAC
Financial Services	21.1%	13.1%
Industrials	17.4%	7.3%
Technology	11.4%	34.3%
Healthcare	9.6%	7.8%
Consumer Cyclical	7.3%	8.2%
Consumer Defensive	6.6%	1.0%
Basic Materials	5.7%	1.9%
Communication Services	3.9%	8.5%
Energy	3.7%	1.2%
Utilities	3.6%	1.4%
Real Estate	1.7%	5.2%

Return for Risk

IFLR vs. NZAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

NZAC

NZAC Risk / Return Rank: 56
NZAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
NZAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
NZAC Omega Ratio Rank: 55
NZAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
NZAC Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

IFLR vs. NZAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator International Developed Managed Floor ETF (IFLR) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IFLR	NZAC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.92	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.59	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.71	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.43	0.61	+0.81

Drawdowns

IFLR vs. NZAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFLR drawdown since its inception was -9.58%, smaller than the maximum NZAC drawdown of -33.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFLR and NZAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	IFLR	NZAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.58%	-33.72%	+24.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-10.10%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.19%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.31%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.65%	-0.82%	-1.83%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.75%	-5.32%	+2.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.32%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IFLR	NZAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.72%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	10.34%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.07%	12.94%	+0.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.07%	16.81%	-3.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.07%	17.14%	-4.07%

IFLR vs. NZAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFLR has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than NZAC's 0.12% expense ratio.

Dividends

IFLR vs. NZAC - Dividend Comparison

IFLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.28%, less than NZAC's 2.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IFLR Innovator International Developed Managed Floor ETF	0.28%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	2.04%	1.90%	1.88%	1.65%	1.81%	1.62%	1.59%	2.17%	2.53%	2.20%	2.00%	2.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IFLR and NZAC in my portfolio?

IFLR and NZAC have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IFLR or NZAC?

On fees, NZAC is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IFLR or NZAC?

NZAC is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for IFLR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IFLR or NZAC?

NZAC has the higher dividend yield at 2.04%, compared with 0.28% for IFLR.

What is the main difference between IFLR and NZAC?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for IFLR and 0.12% for NZAC.