ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ISAC.L (iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and XMAW.L (Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C) are both Global Equities funds - ISAC.L tracks the MSCI ACWI Index while XMAW.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ISAC.L returned 12.63%/yr vs 12.60%/yr for XMAW.L. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ISAC.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XMAW.L.

Performance

ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ISAC.L) and Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

ISAC.L is traded in USD, while XMAW.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the XMAW.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with ISAC.L having a 11.54% return and XMAW.L slightly lower at 11.31%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with ISAC.L having a 12.63% annualized return and XMAW.L not far behind at 12.60%.

ISAC.L

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 4.26%
• YTD: 11.54%
• 6M: 13.01%
• 1Y: 28.81%
• 3Y*: 21.19%
• 5Y*: 11.38%
• 10Y*: 12.63%

XMAW.L

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 4.75%
• YTD: 11.31%
• 6M: 12.92%
• 1Y: 29.29%
• 3Y*: 21.35%
• 5Y*: 11.18%
• 10Y*: 12.60%

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

ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ISAC.L iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	11.54%	22.36%	17.81%	22.57%	-18.16%	18.85%	15.66%	25.77%	-9.73%	24.39%
XMAW.L Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C	11.31%	22.45%	18.54%	23.03%	-19.97%	19.60%	15.68%	26.48%	-9.97%	24.04%

Correlation

The correlation between ISAC.L and XMAW.L is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 3, 2014	0.91

The correlation between ISAC.L and XMAW.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ISAC.L	XMAW.L
Technology	33.9%	31.4%
Financial Services	17.3%	17.2%
Industrials	9.0%	10.2%
Communication Services	8.6%	9.7%
Consumer Cyclical	8.5%	9.6%
Healthcare	7.8%	8.7%
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	3.3%
Energy	3.6%	2.7%
Basic Materials	2.9%	3.4%
Utilities	2.2%	1.9%
Real Estate	1.2%	1.9%

Return for Risk

ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ISAC.L

ISAC.L Risk / Return Rank: 73
ISAC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
ISAC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
ISAC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 73
ISAC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
ISAC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 74

XMAW.L

XMAW.L Risk / Return Rank: 84
XMAW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
XMAW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
XMAW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 86
XMAW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
XMAW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ISAC.L) and Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.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.

	ISAC.L	XMAW.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.31	2.35	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.42	3.44	-0.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.42	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.27	3.08	+0.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.72	13.28	+0.44
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISAC.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.31, which is comparable to the XMAW.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISAC.L and XMAW.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

	ISAC.L	XMAW.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.31	2.35	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.73	0.72	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.79	0.79	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.75	0.66	+0.10

Drawdowns

ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISAC.L drawdown since its inception was -33.82%, roughly equal to the maximum XMAW.L drawdown of -33.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISAC.L and XMAW.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ISAC.L	XMAW.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.82%	-33.17%	-0.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.77%	-9.47%	+0.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.56%	-18.08%	+1.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.07%	-28.13%	+2.06%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.82%	-33.17%	-0.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.72%	-0.80%	+0.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.69%	-5.41%	+0.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.10%	2.20%	-0.10%

Volatility

ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ISAC.L) has a higher volatility of 3.84% compared to Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.L) at 3.48%. This indicates that ISAC.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMAW.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ISAC.L	XMAW.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.84%	3.48%	+0.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.77%	9.58%	+0.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.40%	12.43%	-0.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.57%	15.54%	+0.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.95%	15.89%	+0.06%

ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ISAC.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than XMAW.L's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

ISAC.L vs. XMAW.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ISAC.L nor XMAW.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ISAC.L and XMAW.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, ISAC.L and XMAW.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, ISAC.L or XMAW.L?

On fees, ISAC.L 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, ISAC.L or XMAW.L?

ISAC.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMAW.L.

What is the main difference between ISAC.L and XMAW.L?

ISAC.L tracks MSCI ACWI Index, while XMAW.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ISAC.L and 0.25% for XMAW.L.