PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
INTF vs. DBAW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

INTF vs. DBAW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF (INTF) and Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF (DBAW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INTF achieves a 9.48% return, which is significantly lower than DBAW's 16.12% return. Over the past 10 years, INTF has underperformed DBAW with an annualized return of 9.16%, while DBAW has yielded a comparatively higher 11.44% annualized return.


INTF

1D
-0.84%
1M
2.45%
YTD
9.48%
6M
12.57%
1Y
25.20%
3Y*
19.52%
5Y*
9.49%
10Y*
9.16%

DBAW

1D
-0.51%
1M
6.28%
YTD
16.12%
6M
18.39%
1Y
36.60%
3Y*
21.15%
5Y*
11.32%
10Y*
11.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

INTF vs. DBAW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
INTF
iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF
9.48%35.50%5.99%18.25%-12.31%11.70%2.83%18.46%-15.87%28.46%
DBAW
Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF
16.12%26.47%14.35%16.26%-13.35%13.08%7.44%22.96%-10.38%18.79%

Correlation

The correlation between INTF and DBAW is 0.85, 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

0.85

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

0.85

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

0.86

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

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2015

0.82

The correlation between INTF and DBAW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

INTF vs. DBAW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
INTF
DBAW

Financial Services

25.2%
24.1%

Industrials

19.1%
15.0%

Consumer Cyclical

9.0%
7.9%

Technology

8.5%
18.7%

Healthcare

8.2%
7.2%

Basic Materials

6.6%
6.8%

Consumer Defensive

6.3%
5.3%

Energy

5.9%
5.3%

Utilities

4.7%
3.2%

Communication Services

3.9%
5.0%

Real Estate

2.7%
1.5%

Financial Services

INTF
25.2%
DBAW
24.1%

Industrials

INTF
19.1%
DBAW
15.0%

Consumer Cyclical

INTF
9.0%
DBAW
7.9%

Technology

INTF
8.5%
DBAW
18.7%

Healthcare

INTF
8.2%
DBAW
7.2%

Basic Materials

INTF
6.6%
DBAW
6.8%

Consumer Defensive

INTF
6.3%
DBAW
5.3%

Energy

INTF
5.9%
DBAW
5.3%

Utilities

INTF
4.7%
DBAW
3.2%

Communication Services

INTF
3.9%
DBAW
5.0%

Real Estate

INTF
2.7%
DBAW
1.5%

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

INTF vs. DBAW — Risk / Return Rank

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

INTF
INTF Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
INTF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
INTF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
INTF Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
INTF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
INTF Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
Martin Ratio Rank

DBAW
DBAW Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
DBAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBAW Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
DBAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBAW Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

INTF vs. DBAW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF (INTF) and Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF (DBAW). 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.


INTFDBAWDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.74

2.86

-1.11

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.44

3.90

-1.47

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.55

-0.24

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.48

4.09

-1.61

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.82

16.97

-7.14

INTF vs. DBAW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INTF Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is lower than the DBAW Sharpe Ratio of 2.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INTF and DBAW, 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


INTFDBAWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.74

2.86

-1.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.59

0.83

-0.24

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.75

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.45

0.63

-0.18

Drawdowns

INTF vs. DBAW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INTF drawdown since its inception was -40.39%, which is greater than DBAW's maximum drawdown of -31.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INTF and DBAW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


INTFDBAWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.39%

-31.44%

-8.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.20%

-9.00%

-1.20%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.64%

-14.11%

+0.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.26%

-17.87%

-11.39%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.39%

-31.44%

-8.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.03%

-0.51%

-0.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.70%

-5.00%

-2.70%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.57%

2.16%

+0.41%

Volatility

INTF vs. DBAW - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF (INTF) and Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF (DBAW) have volatilities of 4.52% and 4.71%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


INTFDBAWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.52%

4.71%

-0.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.98%

11.00%

+0.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.55%

12.88%

+1.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.16%

13.74%

+2.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.35%

15.28%

+2.07%

INTF vs. DBAW - Expense Ratio Comparison

INTF has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than DBAW's 0.41% expense ratio.


Dividends

INTF vs. DBAW - Dividend Comparison

INTF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.62%, less than DBAW's 3.29% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DBAW
Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF
3.29%3.83%1.70%3.45%8.81%2.05%2.08%2.91%2.93%2.41%1.99%5.74%
INTF
iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF
2.62%2.87%3.53%3.59%2.81%5.38%2.06%3.65%2.62%3.26%1.66%0.85%

Frequently Asked Questions


INTF and DBAW have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DBAW has higher volatility (4.71%) compared to INTF (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INTF dropped -40.39% vs DBAW's -31.44%.

On 10-year performance, DBAW leads with 11.44% vs 9.16% for INTF. On fees, INTF is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, INTF has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, DBAW has performed better with a 11.44% return vs 9.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

INTF is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.41% for DBAW.

DBAW has the higher dividend yield at 3.29%, compared with 2.62% for INTF.

INTF tracks MSCI World ex USA Diversified Multi-Factor, while DBAW tracks MSCI ACWI ex USA US Dollar Hedged Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for INTF and 0.41% for DBAW.

DBAW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.86 vs 1.74), 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 INTF and DBAW

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