IWFV.L vs. WMVG.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IWFV.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF) and WMVG.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc)) are both Global Equities funds from iShares - IWFV.L tracks the MSCI ACWI Value NR USD while WMVG.L tracks the MSCI World Minimum Volatility. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWFV.L returned 17.65%/yr vs 6.15%/yr for WMVG.L. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWFV.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for WMVG.L.

Performance

IWFV.L vs. WMVG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF (IWFV.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.

Different Trading Currencies

IWFV.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, IWFV.L achieves a 35.48% return, which is significantly higher than WMVG.L's 1.22% return.

IWFV.L

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 16.50%
• YTD: 35.48%
• 6M: 38.78%
• 1Y: 68.86%
• 3Y*: 27.38%
• 5Y*: 17.65%
• 10Y*: 13.95%

WMVG.L

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 1.22%
• 6M: 1.94%
• 1Y: 2.85%
• 3Y*: 9.88%
• 5Y*: 6.15%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
IWFV.L iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF	35.48%	30.69%	6.85%	13.02%	0.95%	21.60%	-6.91%	8.68%
WMVG.L iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc)	1.22%	9.08%	14.49%	7.33%	-8.31%	16.96%	-1.30%	11.65%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFV.L and WMVG.L is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.32
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.50
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 1, 2019	0.58

Over the past year, the correlation between IWFV.L and WMVG.L has dropped to 0.32 - well below their long-term average of 0.58, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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

Sectors	IWFV.L	WMVG.L
Technology	33.9%	20.1%
Financial Services	14.8%	14.0%
Industrials	11.3%	9.2%
Healthcare	8.8%	13.8%
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	5.6%
Communication Services	7.6%	12.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	10.9%
Energy	3.8%	4.5%
Basic Materials	3.0%	1.1%
Utilities	2.5%	8.0%
Real Estate	1.8%	0.7%

Return for Risk

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

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

IWFV.L

IWFV.L Risk / Return Rank: 97
IWFV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
IWFV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
IWFV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 97
IWFV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
IWFV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 96

WMVG.L

WMVG.L Risk / Return Rank: 15
WMVG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
WMVG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
WMVG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 13
WMVG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
WMVG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 16

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF (IWFV.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.

	IWFV.L	WMVG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	5.11	0.39	+4.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.89	0.59	+6.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.97	1.07	+0.89
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.68	0.57	+9.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	37.44	1.42	+36.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current IWFV.L Sharpe Ratio is 5.11, which is higher than the WMVG.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFV.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IWFV.L	WMVG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.11	0.39	+4.72
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.35	0.62	+0.73
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.92	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.79	0.55	+0.24

Drawdowns

IWFV.L vs. WMVG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFV.L drawdown since its inception was -28.79%, roughly equal to the maximum WMVG.L drawdown of -28.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFV.L and WMVG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWFV.L	WMVG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.79%	-28.25%	-0.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.08%	-4.99%	-2.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.82%	-9.09%	-4.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.82%	-15.18%	+1.36%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.79%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-3.30%	+3.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.38%	-4.12%	-0.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.83%	2.00%	-0.17%

Volatility

IWFV.L vs. WMVG.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF (IWFV.L) has a higher volatility of 5.47% compared to iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.L) at 2.29%. This indicates that IWFV.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.

Volatility by Period

	IWFV.L	WMVG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.47%	2.29%	+3.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.17%	5.05%	+6.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.42%	7.21%	+6.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.09%	9.95%	+3.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.10%	12.14%	+2.96%

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

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

Dividends

IWFV.L vs. WMVG.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWFV.L and WMVG.L in my portfolio?

IWFV.L and WMVG.L have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IWFV.L or WMVG.L?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, IWFV.L or WMVG.L?

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

What is the main difference between IWFV.L and WMVG.L?

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