PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IWFS.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Size Factor UCITS ETF) and WMVG.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc)) are both Global Equities funds from iShares - IWFS.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD while WMVG.L tracks the MSCI World Minimum Volatility. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWFS.L returned 6.56%/yr vs 6.17%/yr for WMVG.L. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWFS.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for WMVG.L.

Performance

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI World Size Factor UCITS ETF (IWFS.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IWFS.L is traded in GBp, while WMVG.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the WMVG.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFS.L achieves a 6.39% return, which is significantly higher than WMVG.L's 1.31% return.

IWFS.L

1D
0.39%
1M
2.27%
YTD
6.39%
6M
7.47%
1Y
18.20%
3Y*
11.67%
5Y*
6.56%
10Y*
9.00%

WMVG.L

1D
0.09%
1M
1.16%
YTD
1.31%
6M
1.93%
1Y
2.81%
3Y*
9.78%
5Y*
6.17%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
IWFS.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Size Factor UCITS ETF		6.39%13.13%7.64%9.74%-8.21%13.88%7.33%10.63%
WMVG.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc)		1.31%9.08%14.49%7.33%-8.31%16.96%-1.30%11.65%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFS.L and WMVG.L is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.49

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

0.58

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

0.65

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 1, 2019

0.67

The correlation between IWFS.L and WMVG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.67 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWFS.L
WMVG.L

Industrials

21.4%
9.2%

Financial Services

14.2%
14.0%

Technology

12.0%
20.1%

Consumer Cyclical

9.7%
5.6%

Healthcare

7.4%
13.8%

Basic Materials

7.1%
1.1%

Real Estate

6.9%
0.7%

Consumer Defensive

6.6%
10.9%

Utilities

6.3%
8.0%

Communication Services

4.8%
12.1%

Energy

3.5%
4.5%

Industrials

IWFS.L
21.4%
WMVG.L
9.2%

Financial Services

IWFS.L
14.2%
WMVG.L
14.0%

Technology

IWFS.L
12.0%
WMVG.L
20.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IWFS.L
9.7%
WMVG.L
5.6%

Healthcare

IWFS.L
7.4%
WMVG.L
13.8%

Basic Materials

IWFS.L
7.1%
WMVG.L
1.1%

Real Estate

IWFS.L
6.9%
WMVG.L
0.7%

Consumer Defensive

IWFS.L
6.6%
WMVG.L
10.9%

Utilities

IWFS.L
6.3%
WMVG.L
8.0%

Communication Services

IWFS.L
4.8%
WMVG.L
12.1%

Energy

IWFS.L
3.5%
WMVG.L
4.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Edge MSCI World Size Factor UCITS ETF

iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc)

Often compared with IWFS.L:
IWFS.L vs. URTHIWFS.L vs. EQQQ.LIWFS.L vs. VOOIWFS.L vs. XDEQ.LIWFS.L vs. VEAIWFS.L vs. IWFV.LIWFS.L vs. XLKQ.L
Often compared with WMVG.L:
WMVG.L vs. MVUS.LWMVG.L vs. PQVG.LWMVG.L vs. MINV.LWMVG.L vs. MVEW.LWMVG.L vs. VSCGXWMVG.L vs. AVGC.LWMVG.L vs. VHYD.L

Return for Risk

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWFS.L
IWFS.L Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
IWFS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWFS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWFS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
IWFS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWFS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank
WMVG.L
WMVG.L Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
WMVG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WMVG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
WMVG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
WMVG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
WMVG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
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.

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI World Size Factor UCITS ETF (IWFS.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.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.

IWFS.LWMVG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.77
0.39

+1.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.49
0.59

+1.90

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.07

+0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.18

0.56

+1.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.72

1.40

+6.32

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.77, which is higher than the WMVG.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFS.L and WMVG.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

IWFS.LWMVG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.77

0.39

+1.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

0.62

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.63

0.55

+0.07

Drawdowns

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFS.L drawdown since its inception was -29.90%, which is greater than WMVG.L's maximum drawdown of -28.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFS.L and WMVG.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWFS.LWMVG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.90%

-28.25%

-1.65%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.31%

-4.99%

-3.32%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.42%

-9.09%

-5.33%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.33%

-15.18%

-2.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-29.90%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.80%

-3.21%

+2.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.67%

-4.12%

-0.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.35%

2.01%

+0.34%

Volatility

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Edge MSCI World Size Factor UCITS ETF (IWFS.L) has a higher volatility of 2.53% compared to iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.L) at 2.13%. This indicates that IWFS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WMVG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWFS.LWMVG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.53%

2.13%

+0.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.92%

5.03%

+2.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.23%

7.21%

+3.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.96%

9.95%

+3.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.39%

12.14%

+2.25%

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFS.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than WMVG.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWFS.L vs. WMVG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWFS.L nor WMVG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

IWFS.L and WMVG.L have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IWFS.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IWFS.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for WMVG.L.

IWFS.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while WMVG.L tracks MSCI World Minimum Volatility. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for IWFS.L and 0.35% for WMVG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWFS.L and WMVG.L

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