PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IWQU.L vs. WMVG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IWQU.L (iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS) and WMVG.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc)) are both Global Equities funds from iShares - IWQU.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, IWQU.L returned 10.34%/yr vs 5.06%/yr for WMVG.L. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IWQU.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for WMVG.L.

Performance

IWQU.L vs. WMVG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWQU.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

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWQU.L achieves a 8.47% return, which is significantly higher than WMVG.L's 1.07% return.

IWQU.L

1D
0.85%
1M
1.95%
YTD
8.47%
6M
9.52%
1Y
20.74%
3Y*
18.41%
5Y*
10.34%
10Y*
12.42%

WMVG.L

1D
0.14%
1M
-0.04%
YTD
1.07%
6M
2.74%
1Y
2.09%
3Y*
12.61%
5Y*
5.06%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
IWQU.L
iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS		8.47%15.28%17.38%25.66%-19.26%23.70%14.95%15.72%
WMVG.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc)		1.07%17.31%12.58%13.00%-18.11%15.90%1.73%11.55%

Correlation

The correlation between IWQU.L and WMVG.L is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.55

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

0.55

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 IWQU.L and WMVG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (3 years) to 0.67 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors
IWQU.L
WMVG.L

Technology

31.6%
20.1%

Financial Services

13.9%
14.0%

Industrials

10.6%
9.2%

Healthcare

9.4%
13.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.9%
5.6%

Communication Services

8.6%
12.1%

Consumer Defensive

5.1%
10.9%

Energy

4.2%
4.5%

Basic Materials

3.2%
1.1%

Utilities

2.5%
8.0%

Real Estate

1.7%
0.7%

Technology

IWQU.L
31.6%
WMVG.L
20.1%

Financial Services

IWQU.L
13.9%
WMVG.L
14.0%

Industrials

IWQU.L
10.6%
WMVG.L
9.2%

Healthcare

IWQU.L
9.4%
WMVG.L
13.8%

Consumer Cyclical

IWQU.L
8.9%
WMVG.L
5.6%

Communication Services

IWQU.L
8.6%
WMVG.L
12.1%

Consumer Defensive

IWQU.L
5.1%
WMVG.L
10.9%

Energy

IWQU.L
4.2%
WMVG.L
4.5%

Basic Materials

IWQU.L
3.2%
WMVG.L
1.1%

Utilities

IWQU.L
2.5%
WMVG.L
8.0%

Real Estate

IWQU.L
1.7%
WMVG.L
0.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS

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

Often compared with IWQU.L:
IWQU.L vs. XDEQ.LIWQU.L vs. IWDA.ASIWQU.L vs. VOOIWQU.L vs. IWVL.LIWQU.L vs. IWMO.MIIWQU.L vs. VTIWQU.L vs. IWVG.L
Often compared with WMVG.L:
WMVG.L vs. MVUS.LWMVG.L vs. PQVG.LWMVG.L vs. MVEW.LWMVG.L vs. MINV.LWMVG.L vs. VSCGXWMVG.L vs. AVGC.LWMVG.L vs. VHYD.L

Return for Risk

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWQU.L
IWQU.L Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
IWQU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWQU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWQU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
IWQU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWQU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWQU.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.

IWQU.LWMVG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.83
0.18

+1.65

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.83
0.31

+2.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.04

+0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.45

0.27

+2.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.14

0.63

+9.50

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

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

The current IWQU.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is higher than the WMVG.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWQU.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

IWQU.LWMVG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.83

0.18

+1.65

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.67

0.34

+0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.80

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

0.41

+0.38

Drawdowns

IWQU.L vs. WMVG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWQU.L drawdown since its inception was -33.05%, smaller than the maximum WMVG.L drawdown of -36.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWQU.L and WMVG.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWQU.LWMVG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.05%

-36.20%

+3.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.53%

-6.70%

-1.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.09%

-11.59%

-4.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.70%

-32.15%

+4.45%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.05%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-3.62%

+3.62%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.69%

-7.09%

+2.40%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.07%

2.90%

-0.83%

Volatility

IWQU.L vs. WMVG.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWQU.L) has a higher volatility of 3.18% compared to iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.L) at 2.32%. This indicates that IWQU.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

IWQU.LWMVG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.18%

2.32%

+0.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.91%

6.88%

+2.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.45%

10.17%

+1.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.42%

14.83%

+0.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.81%

16.81%

-1.00%

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

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

Dividends

IWQU.L vs. WMVG.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

IWQU.L and WMVG.L have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

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

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

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IWQU.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