IMID.L vs. GLOF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IMID.L (SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI) and GLOF (iShares Global Equity Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds - IMID.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD while GLOF tracks the STOXX Global Equity Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IMID.L returned 10.97%/yr vs 11.56%/yr for GLOF. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IMID.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for GLOF.

Performance

IMID.L vs. GLOF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) and iShares Global Equity Factor ETF (GLOF). 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 lower than GLOF's 13.19% 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*: —

GLOF

• 1D: -0.77%
• 1M: 5.15%
• YTD: 13.19%
• 6M: 14.18%
• 1Y: 30.42%
• 3Y*: 22.67%
• 5Y*: 11.56%
• 10Y*: 12.29%

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

IMID.L vs. GLOF - 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%
GLOF iShares Global Equity Factor ETF	13.19%	23.92%	17.49%	22.38%	-16.97%	18.68%	10.00%	23.21%	-14.36%

Correlation

The correlation between IMID.L and GLOF is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2018	0.63

The correlation between IMID.L and GLOF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

IMID.L vs. GLOF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IMID.L	GLOF
Industrials	19.5%	9.3%
Financial Services	13.0%	16.7%
Consumer Cyclical	9.7%	10.7%
Consumer Defensive	9.7%	5.7%
Healthcare	9.6%	8.2%
Technology	9.6%	28.8%
Basic Materials	8.2%	3.3%
Real Estate	8.0%	1.1%
Utilities	3.3%	3.1%
Communication Services	3.1%	8.7%
Energy	1.6%	4.4%

Return for Risk

IMID.L vs. GLOF — 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

GLOF

GLOF Risk / Return Rank: 73
GLOF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
GLOF Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
GLOF Omega Ratio Rank: 71
GLOF Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
GLOF Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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. GLOF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) and iShares Global Equity Factor ETF (GLOF). 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	GLOF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	2.43	-0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.58	3.41	+0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.43	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.50	3.38	+0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.47	15.08	-0.61
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. GLOF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMID.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is comparable to the GLOF Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMID.L and GLOF, 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	GLOF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.41	2.43	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71	0.74	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.72	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.60	-0.04

Drawdowns

IMID.L vs. GLOF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMID.L drawdown since its inception was -39.56%, which is greater than GLOF's maximum drawdown of -34.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMID.L and GLOF.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMID.L	GLOF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.56%	-34.12%	-5.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.69%	-9.05%	+0.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.21%	-16.12%	-1.09%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.07%	-25.15%	-0.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.68%	-0.77%	+0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.40%	-6.12%	+0.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.11%	2.02%	+0.09%

Volatility

IMID.L vs. GLOF - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) has a higher volatility of 4.04% compared to iShares Global Equity Factor ETF (GLOF) at 3.65%. This indicates that IMID.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLOF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IMID.L	GLOF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.04%	3.65%	+0.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.94%	10.10%	-0.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.62%	12.57%	+0.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.54%	15.69%	-0.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.23%	17.17%	+4.06%

IMID.L vs. GLOF - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMID.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than GLOF's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMID.L vs. GLOF - Dividend Comparison

IMID.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GLOF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GLOF iShares Global Equity Factor ETF	1.50%	1.70%	2.59%	2.51%	2.53%	1.90%	1.73%	2.41%	2.03%	1.94%	1.94%	0.92%
IMID.L SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

IMID.L and GLOF have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IMID.L or GLOF?

On fees, GLOF is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMID.L or GLOF?

GLOF is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for IMID.L.

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

IMID.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while GLOF tracks STOXX Global Equity Factor Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for IMID.L and 0.20% for GLOF.