ILIT vs. ACWI

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ILIT (Ishares Lithium Miners And Producers ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ILIT is a Lithium & Battery Metals fund tracking the STOXX Global Lithium Miners and Producers Index - USD - Benchmark TR Net, while ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ILIT returned -6.55%/yr vs 20.00%/yr for ACWI. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ILIT charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.

Performance

ILIT vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ishares Lithium Miners And Producers ETF (ILIT) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILIT achieves a 15.18% return, which is significantly higher than ACWI's 9.86% return.

ILIT

• 1D: -4.36%
• 1M: -10.78%
• YTD: 15.18%
• 6M: 12.51%
• 1Y: 147.87%
• 3Y*: -6.55%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ACWI

• 1D: -2.00%
• 1M: -0.35%
• YTD: 9.86%
• 6M: 9.11%
• 1Y: 25.60%
• 3Y*: 20.00%
• 5Y*: 10.74%
• 10Y*: 13.09%

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

ILIT vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ILIT Ishares Lithium Miners And Producers ETF	15.18%	81.51%	-45.14%	-28.86%
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	9.86%	22.41%	17.45%	8.27%

Correlation

The correlation between ILIT and ACWI is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2023	0.49

ILIT vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ILIT	ACWI
Basic Materials	85.0%	3.6%
Industrials	10.8%	10.3%
Consumer Cyclical	3.7%	8.6%
Technology	0.4%	33.0%
Communication Services	-	8.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.7%
Energy	-	3.6%
Financial Services	-	15.9%
Healthcare	-	7.7%
Real Estate	-	1.6%
Utilities	-	2.7%

Return for Risk

ILIT vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILIT

ILIT Risk / Return Rank: 83
ILIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
ILIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
ILIT Omega Ratio Rank: 71
ILIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
ILIT Martin Ratio Rank: 81

ACWI

ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 58
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 58
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

ILIT vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ishares Lithium Miners And Producers ETF (ILIT) 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.

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.

	ILIT	ACWI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.93	1.89	+1.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.28	2.60	+0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.34	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.58	2.64	+2.93
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.54	11.51	+4.04

ILIT vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILIT Sharpe Ratio is 2.93, which is higher than the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILIT 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.

Drawdowns

ILIT vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILIT drawdown since its inception was -73.69%, which is greater than ACWI's maximum drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILIT and ACWI.

Drawdown Indicators

	ILIT	ACWI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-73.69%	-56.00%	-17.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.68%	-9.73%	-16.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-73.69%	-16.55%	-57.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.42%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.53%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.65%	-2.83%	-21.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-45.39%	-8.59%	-36.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.55%	2.23%	+7.32%

Volatility

ILIT vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

Ishares Lithium Miners And Producers ETF (ILIT) has a higher volatility of 15.14% compared to iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) at 5.57%. This indicates that ILIT'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.

Volatility by Period

	ILIT	ACWI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.14%	5.57%	+9.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.33%	11.38%	+23.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.74%	13.64%	+37.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	42.02%	16.20%	+25.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	42.02%	17.08%	+24.94%

ILIT vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILIT has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

ILIT vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

ILIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.79%, more than ACWI's 1.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	1.45%	1.55%	1.70%	1.88%	1.79%	1.71%	1.43%	2.33%	2.18%	1.94%	2.19%	2.56%
ILIT Ishares Lithium Miners And Producers ETF	1.79%	2.27%	6.48%	0.69%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ILIT and ACWI in my portfolio?

ILIT and ACWI have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ILIT or ACWI?

ILIT has higher volatility (15.14%) compared to ACWI (5.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILIT dropped -73.69% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

Which ETF is better, ILIT or ACWI?

On 3-year performance, ACWI leads with 20.00% vs -6.55% for ILIT. On fees, ACWI is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, ACWI has been the lower-risk option at 5.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ILIT or ACWI?

Over the 3-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 20.00% return vs -6.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ILIT or ACWI?

ACWI is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for ILIT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ILIT or ACWI?

ILIT has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 1.45% for ACWI.

What is the main difference between ILIT and ACWI?

ILIT is categorized as Lithium & Battery Metals, while ACWI is Global Equities. ILIT tracks STOXX Global Lithium Miners and Producers Index - USD - Benchmark TR Net, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for ILIT and 0.32% for ACWI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.93 vs 1.89), 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.