ISVBF vs. ACWI
ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ISVBF is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ISVBF returned -2.48%/yr vs 11.19%/yr for ACWI. Their 0.14 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ISVBF charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.
Performance
ISVBF vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ISVBF achieves a -6.75% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 14.26% return.
ISVBF
- 1D
- -0.66%
- 1M
- 9.06%
- 6M
- -8.63%
- YTD
- -6.75%
- 1Y
- -0.99%
- 3Y*
- 8.45%
- 5Y*
- -2.48%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -4.43%
ACWI
- 1D
- 1.70%
- 1M
- 2.87%
- 6M
- 11.09%
- YTD
- 14.26%
- 1Y
- 25.29%
- 3Y*
- 20.43%
- 5Y*
- 11.19%
- 10Y*
- 12.70%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.62%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $393.85M | $471.51M | $504.89M | |
| $147.49K | $255.95K | $315.23K |
ISVBF vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -6.75% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF | 14.26% | 22.41% | 17.45% | 22.27% | -18.39% | 9.13% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISVBF and ACWI is 0.28, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.28 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.21 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2021 | 0.14 |
The correlation between ISVBF and ACWI shifts across timeframes, from 0.14 (all time) to 0.28 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
ISVBF vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank
ISVBF
ACWI
ISVBF vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) 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.
| ISVBF | ACWI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.34 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 1.33 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.04 | 2.61 | -2.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.09 | 10.90 | -10.99 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ISVBF vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ISVBF drawdown since its inception was -53.78%, roughly equal to the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISVBF and ACWI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ISVBF | ACWI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.78% | -56.00% | +2.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -24.14% | -9.73% | -14.41% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.14% | -16.55% | -7.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -46.06% | -26.42% | -19.64% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.53% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.42% | 0.00% | -24.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.57% | -8.55% | -24.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.23% | 2.33% | +8.90% |
Volatility
ISVBF vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a higher volatility of 6.46% compared to iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) at 4.32%. This indicates that ISVBF'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ISVBF | ACWI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.46% | 4.32% | +2.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.45% | 11.81% | +14.64% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.60% | 14.06% | +17.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.08% | 16.25% | +13.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.06% | 17.08% | +12.98% |
ISVBF vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison
ISVBF has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.
Dividends
ISVBF vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison
ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ACWI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF | 1.40% | 1.55% | 1.70% | 1.88% | 1.79% | 1.71% | 1.43% | 2.33% | 2.18% | 1.94% | 2.19% | 2.56% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | 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
ISVBF and ACWI have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ISVBF has higher volatility (6.46%) compared to ACWI (4.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs ACWI's -56.00%.
On 5-year performance, ACWI leads with 11.19% vs -2.48% for ISVBF. On fees, ACWI is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, ACWI has been the lower-risk option at 4.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 11.19% return vs -2.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ACWI is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for ISVBF.
ACWI has the higher dividend yield at 1.40%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
ISVBF is categorized as China Equities, while ACWI is Global Equities. ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ISVBF and 0.32% for ACWI.
ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs -0.03), 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.
Find the right allocation for ISVBF and ACWI
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