IMID.L vs. ACWD.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IMID.L (SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI) and ACWD.L (SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds from State Street - IMID.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD while ACWD.L tracks the MSCI ACWI Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IMID.L returned 10.97%/yr vs 11.33%/yr for ACWD.L. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IMID.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for ACWD.L.

Performance

IMID.L vs. ACWD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) and SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMID.L achieves a 12.31% return, which is significantly higher than ACWD.L's 11.57% return.

IMID.L

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 4.49%
• YTD: 12.31%
• 6M: 13.92%
• 1Y: 30.66%
• 3Y*: 20.84%
• 5Y*: 10.97%
• 10Y*: —

ACWD.L

• 1D: -0.66%
• 1M: 4.34%
• YTD: 11.57%
• 6M: 13.24%
• 1Y: 29.71%
• 3Y*: 21.32%
• 5Y*: 11.33%
• 10Y*: 12.77%

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

IMID.L vs. ACWD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
IMID.L SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI	12.31%	22.16%	16.31%	21.65%	-17.64%	17.85%	16.14%	25.35%	-9.90%
ACWD.L SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF	11.57%	22.83%	17.76%	22.27%	-18.37%	18.77%	15.91%	25.80%	-9.03%

Correlation

The correlation between IMID.L and ACWD.L is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.98
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.99
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2018	0.98

The correlation between IMID.L and ACWD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

IMID.L vs. ACWD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IMID.L	ACWD.L
Industrials	19.5%	10.9%
Financial Services	13.0%	16.5%
Consumer Cyclical	9.7%	9.3%
Consumer Defensive	9.7%	4.9%
Healthcare	9.6%	8.0%
Technology	9.6%	29.2%
Basic Materials	8.2%	3.6%
Real Estate	8.0%	1.7%
Utilities	3.3%	2.7%
Communication Services	3.1%	9.0%
Energy	1.6%	4.3%

Return for Risk

IMID.L vs. ACWD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMID.L

IMID.L Risk / Return Rank: 74
IMID.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
IMID.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
IMID.L Omega Ratio Rank: 73
IMID.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
IMID.L Martin Ratio Rank: 75

ACWD.L

ACWD.L Risk / Return Rank: 72
ACWD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
ACWD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
ACWD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 71
ACWD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
ACWD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

IMID.L vs. ACWD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) and SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.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.

	IMID.L	ACWD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	2.36	+0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.58	3.49	+0.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.44	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.50	3.39	+0.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.47	14.15	+0.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IMID.L vs. ACWD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMID.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is comparable to the ACWD.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMID.L and ACWD.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IMID.L	ACWD.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.41	2.36	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71	0.73	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.80	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.73	-0.16

Drawdowns

IMID.L vs. ACWD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMID.L drawdown since its inception was -39.56%, which is greater than ACWD.L's maximum drawdown of -33.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMID.L and ACWD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMID.L	ACWD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.56%	-33.64%	-5.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.69%	-8.73%	+0.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.21%	-16.51%	-0.70%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.07%	-26.18%	+0.11%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.68%	-0.66%	-0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.40%	-4.67%	-0.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.11%	2.09%	+0.02%

Volatility

IMID.L vs. ACWD.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) and SPDR MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWD.L) have volatilities of 4.04% and 3.87%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	IMID.L	ACWD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.04%	3.87%	+0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.94%	9.89%	+0.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.62%	12.56%	+0.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.54%	15.58%	-0.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.23%	15.85%	+5.38%

IMID.L vs. ACWD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMID.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWD.L's 0.12% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMID.L vs. ACWD.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IMID.L nor ACWD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IMID.L and ACWD.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, IMID.L and ACWD.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, IMID.L or ACWD.L?

On fees, ACWD.L 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, IMID.L or ACWD.L?

ACWD.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for IMID.L.

What is the main difference between IMID.L and ACWD.L?

IMID.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while ACWD.L tracks MSCI ACWI Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for IMID.L and 0.12% for ACWD.L.