PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ITDF vs. ACWI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ITDF vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF (ITDF) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ITDF achieves a 11.50% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 12.13% return.


ITDF

1D
-0.76%
1M
4.54%
YTD
11.50%
6M
12.25%
1Y
27.50%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

ACWI

1D
-0.83%
1M
5.28%
YTD
12.13%
6M
12.96%
1Y
29.18%
3Y*
21.15%
5Y*
11.28%
10Y*
12.85%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ITDF vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
ITDF
Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF
11.50%20.86%16.15%12.92%
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
12.13%22.41%17.45%12.29%

Correlation

The correlation between ITDF and ACWI is 0.99 - 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

0.99

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 20, 2023

0.99

The correlation between ITDF and ACWI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

ITDF vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ITDF
ACWI

Technology

26.4%
29.4%

Financial Services

15.8%
16.1%

Industrials

11.7%
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

9.2%
9.3%

Healthcare

8.1%
8.1%

Communication Services

8.0%
9.0%

Real Estate

5.2%
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.7%
5.0%

Basic Materials

4.2%
3.7%

Energy

4.2%
4.2%

Utilities

2.6%
2.6%

Technology

ITDF
26.4%
ACWI
29.4%

Financial Services

ITDF
15.8%
ACWI
16.1%

Industrials

ITDF
11.7%
ACWI
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

ITDF
9.2%
ACWI
9.3%

Healthcare

ITDF
8.1%
ACWI
8.1%

Communication Services

ITDF
8.0%
ACWI
9.0%

Real Estate

ITDF
5.2%
ACWI
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

ITDF
4.7%
ACWI
5.0%

Basic Materials

ITDF
4.2%
ACWI
3.7%

Energy

ITDF
4.2%
ACWI
4.2%

Utilities

ITDF
2.6%
ACWI
2.6%

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

ITDF vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

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

ITDF
ITDF Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
ITDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ITDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
ITDF Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
ITDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
ITDF Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWI
ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

ITDF vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF (ITDF) 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.


ITDFACWIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

0.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.41

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.97

3.01

-0.05

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.13

13.53

-0.40

ITDF vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ITDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is comparable to the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ITDF and ACWI, 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


ITDFACWIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.29

2.29

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.71

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.75

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.76

0.43

+1.34

Drawdowns

ITDF vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ITDF drawdown since its inception was -15.67%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ITDF and ACWI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ITDFACWIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.67%

-56.00%

+40.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.32%

-9.73%

+0.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.42%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.76%

-0.83%

+0.07%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.51%

-8.61%

+7.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.10%

2.16%

-0.06%

Volatility

ITDF vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF (ITDF) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) have volatilities of 3.79% and 3.93%, 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


ITDFACWIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.79%

3.93%

-0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.67%

10.29%

-0.62%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.04%

12.78%

-0.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.88%

16.05%

-2.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.88%

17.11%

-3.23%

ITDF vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

ITDF has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.


Dividends

ITDF vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

ITDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.48%, more than ACWI's 1.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
1.38%1.55%1.70%1.88%1.79%1.71%1.43%2.33%2.18%1.94%2.19%2.56%
ITDF
Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2050 ETF
1.48%1.65%1.55%0.85%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.99, ITDF and ACWI 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.

ACWI has higher volatility (3.93%) compared to ITDF (3.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ITDF dropped -15.67% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

On 1-year performance, ACWI leads with 29.18% vs 27.50% for ITDF. On fees, ITDF is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, ITDF has been the lower-risk option at 3.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 29.18% return vs 27.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ITDF is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.

ITDF has the higher dividend yield at 1.48%, compared with 1.38% for ACWI.

ITDF is categorized as Target Retirement Date, while ACWI is Global Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for ITDF and 0.32% for ACWI.

ITDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 2.29), 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 ITDF 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