PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ILCG vs. ACWI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ILCG vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILCG achieves a 14.48% return, which is significantly higher than ACWI's 12.13% return. Over the past 10 years, ILCG has outperformed ACWI with an annualized return of 18.15%, while ACWI has yielded a comparatively lower 12.85% annualized return.


ILCG

1D
-1.02%
1M
7.68%
YTD
14.48%
6M
14.61%
1Y
29.51%
3Y*
26.55%
5Y*
14.95%
10Y*
18.15%

ACWI

1D
-0.83%
1M
5.28%
YTD
12.13%
6M
12.96%
1Y
29.18%
3Y*
21.15%
5Y*
11.28%
10Y*
12.85%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ILCG vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF
14.48%16.71%32.82%40.41%-31.75%24.33%38.56%33.22%2.06%30.57%
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
12.13%22.41%17.45%22.27%-18.39%18.66%16.34%26.59%-9.19%24.33%

Correlation

The correlation between ILCG and ACWI is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.89

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.89

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.91

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2008

0.88

The correlation between ILCG and ACWI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

ILCG vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ILCG
ACWI

Technology

49.8%
29.4%

Communication Services

14.5%
9.0%

Consumer Cyclical

10.6%
9.3%

Industrials

8.3%
10.9%

Financial Services

6.0%
16.1%

Healthcare

5.3%
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

1.6%
5.0%

Real Estate

1.4%
1.8%

Basic Materials

1.1%
3.7%

Utilities

0.8%
2.6%

Energy

0.5%
4.2%

Technology

ILCG
49.8%
ACWI
29.4%

Communication Services

ILCG
14.5%
ACWI
9.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ILCG
10.6%
ACWI
9.3%

Industrials

ILCG
8.3%
ACWI
10.9%

Financial Services

ILCG
6.0%
ACWI
16.1%

Healthcare

ILCG
5.3%
ACWI
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

ILCG
1.6%
ACWI
5.0%

Real Estate

ILCG
1.4%
ACWI
1.8%

Basic Materials

ILCG
1.1%
ACWI
3.7%

Utilities

ILCG
0.8%
ACWI
2.6%

Energy

ILCG
0.5%
ACWI
4.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ILCG vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILCG
ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWI
ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ILCG vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.


ILCGACWIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.47

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.72

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.41

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.89

3.01

-1.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.68

13.53

-6.85

ILCG vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is comparable to the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILCG and ACWI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ILCGACWIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.82

2.29

-0.47

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

0.71

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

0.75

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.59

0.43

+0.16

Drawdowns

ILCG vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILCG drawdown since its inception was -52.98%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILCG and ACWI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ILCGACWIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-52.98%

-56.00%

+3.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.65%

-9.73%

-5.92%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.10%

-16.55%

-6.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.38%

-26.42%

-8.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.38%

-33.53%

-1.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.02%

-0.83%

-0.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.22%

-8.61%

+0.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.43%

2.16%

+2.27%

Volatility

ILCG vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) has a higher volatility of 4.40% compared to iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) at 3.93%. This indicates that ILCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ILCGACWIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.40%

3.93%

+0.47%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.81%

10.29%

+2.52%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.31%

12.78%

+3.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.00%

16.05%

+5.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.53%

17.11%

+4.42%

ILCG vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILCG has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.


Dividends

ILCG vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

ILCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%, less than ACWI's 1.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
1.38%1.55%1.70%1.88%1.79%1.71%1.43%2.33%2.18%1.94%2.19%2.56%
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF
0.40%0.47%0.50%0.69%0.75%0.34%0.28%0.54%0.81%0.89%0.95%0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions


ILCG and ACWI have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ILCG has higher volatility (4.40%) compared to ACWI (3.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILCG dropped -52.98% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

On 10-year performance, ILCG leads with 18.15% vs 12.85% for ACWI. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ACWI has been the lower-risk option at 3.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 18.15% return vs 12.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.

ACWI has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.40% for ILCG.

ILCG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while ACWI is Global Equities. ILCG tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for ILCG and 0.32% for ACWI.

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.82), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ILCG and ACWI

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer