PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IUSG vs. ACWI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IUSG vs. ACWI

Last updated Aug 4, 2026
Documentation

IUSG (iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IUSG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the S&P 900 Growth Index, while ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IUSG returned 17.20%/yr vs 12.51%/yr for ACWI. Their correlation of 0.90 means they have usually moved in the same direction. IUSG charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.

Performance

IUSG vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF (IUSG) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with IUSG having a 12.72% return and ACWI slightly lower at 12.35%. Over the past 10 years, IUSG has outperformed ACWI with an annualized return of 17.20%, while ACWI has yielded a comparatively lower 12.51% annualized return.

IUSG

1D
2.17%
1M
1.92%
6M
11.50%
YTD
12.72%
1Y
24.41%
3Y*
25.35%
5Y*
13.30%
10Y*
17.20%
ALL TIME*
8.19%

ACWI

1D
0.97%
1M
1.15%
6M
8.65%
YTD
12.35%
1Y
24.97%
3Y*
19.75%
5Y*
10.91%
10Y*
12.51%
ALL TIME*
8.52%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

ACWI

iShares MSCI ACWI ETF
$355.08M$458.17M$501.32M

IUSG

iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF
$105.73M$92.27M$99.82M

IUSG vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IUSG
iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF		12.72%21.23%34.70%29.28%-28.81%31.26%32.65%30.62%-0.79%27.02%
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF		12.35%22.41%17.45%22.27%-18.39%18.66%16.34%26.59%-9.19%24.33%

Correlation

The correlation between IUSG and ACWI is 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.92

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.90

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.92

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2008

0.90

The correlation between IUSG and ACWI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

IUSG vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IUSG
ACWI

Technology

50.9%
32.7%

Communication Services

14.9%
8.0%

Financial Services

8.6%
16.0%

Consumer Cyclical

8.5%
8.7%

Industrials

7.7%
10.8%

Healthcare

6.5%
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

1.0%
4.7%

Real Estate

0.8%
1.6%

Basic Materials

0.5%
3.4%

Utilities

0.4%
2.4%

Energy

0.2%
3.6%

Technology

IUSG
50.9%
ACWI
32.7%

Communication Services

IUSG
14.9%
ACWI
8.0%

Financial Services

IUSG
8.6%
ACWI
16.0%

Consumer Cyclical

IUSG
8.5%
ACWI
8.7%

Industrials

IUSG
7.7%
ACWI
10.8%

Healthcare

IUSG
6.5%
ACWI
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

IUSG
1.0%
ACWI
4.7%

Real Estate

IUSG
0.8%
ACWI
1.6%

Basic Materials

IUSG
0.5%
ACWI
3.4%

Utilities

IUSG
0.4%
ACWI
2.4%

Energy

IUSG
0.2%
ACWI
3.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF

iShares MSCI ACWI ETF

Often compared with IUSG:
IUSG vs. IUSVIUSG vs. SCHGIUSG vs. VUGIUSG vs. QQQIUSG vs. IVWIUSG vs. IVVIUSG vs. VOOG
Often compared with ACWI:
ACWI vs. VTACWI vs. SPYACWI vs. VWRL.LACWI vs. ACWXACWI vs. VOOACWI vs. ACWI.LACWI vs. VTI

Return for Risk

IUSG vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
IUSG
IUSG Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
IUSG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IUSG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
IUSG Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
IUSG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
IUSG Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank
ACWI
ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IUSG vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF (IUSG) 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.

IUSGACWIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.38
1.80

-0.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.95
2.49

-0.54

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.32

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.88

2.58

-0.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.96

10.76

-3.81

IUSG vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IUSG Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is comparable to the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 1.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IUSG 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...

Drawdowns

IUSG vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IUSG drawdown since its inception was -63.41%, which is greater than ACWI's maximum drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IUSG and ACWI.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IUSGACWIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-63.41%

-56.00%

-7.41%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.07%

-9.73%

-3.34%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.28%

-16.55%

-5.73%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.21%

-26.42%

-5.79%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.35%

-33.53%

+1.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.17%

-0.63%

-1.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.33%

-8.55%

-12.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.52%

2.33%

+1.19%

Volatility

IUSG vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF (IUSG) has a higher volatility of 6.24% compared to iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) at 4.14%. This indicates that IUSG'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

IUSGACWIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.24%

4.14%

+2.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.68%

11.71%

+2.97%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.84%

13.99%

+3.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.22%

16.23%

+4.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.55%

17.07%

+3.48%

IUSG vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

IUSG has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

IUSG vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

IUSG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.49%, less than ACWI's 1.42% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF		1.42%1.55%1.70%1.88%1.79%1.71%1.43%2.33%2.18%1.94%2.19%2.56%
IUSG
iShares Core S&P U.S. Growth ETF		0.49%0.53%0.59%1.12%1.07%0.59%0.93%1.64%1.32%1.28%1.48%1.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.92, IUSG 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.

IUSG has higher volatility (6.24%) compared to ACWI (4.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IUSG dropped -63.41% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

On 10-year performance, IUSG leads with 17.20% vs 12.51% for ACWI. On fees, IUSG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ACWI has been the lower-risk option at 4.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IUSG has performed better with a 17.20% return vs 12.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IUSG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.

ACWI has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 0.49% for IUSG.

IUSG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while ACWI is Global Equities. IUSG tracks S&P 900 Growth Index, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for IUSG and 0.32% for ACWI.

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs 1.38), 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 IUSG 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