MINV.L vs. CLMP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MINV.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF) and CLMP.L (HANetf iClima Global Decarbonisation Enablers UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, from iShares and HANetf respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MINV.L returned 6.32%/yr vs -0.18%/yr for CLMP.L. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MINV.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CLMP.L.

Performance

MINV.L vs. CLMP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (MINV.L) and HANetf iClima Global Decarbonisation Enablers UCITS ETF (CLMP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MINV.L achieves a 1.01% return, which is significantly lower than CLMP.L's 17.77% return.

MINV.L

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 1.83%
• YTD: 1.01%
• 6M: 0.93%
• 1Y: 2.57%
• 3Y*: 6.54%
• 5Y*: 6.32%
• 10Y*: 7.86%

CLMP.L

• 1D: -1.39%
• 1M: 5.97%
• YTD: 17.77%
• 6M: 16.29%
• 1Y: 40.86%
• 3Y*: 4.39%
• 5Y*: -0.18%
• 10Y*: —

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

MINV.L vs. CLMP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
MINV.L iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF	1.01%	3.37%	12.86%	1.50%	1.23%	15.98%	-1.43%
CLMP.L HANetf iClima Global Decarbonisation Enablers UCITS ETF	17.77%	17.77%	-15.12%	-1.33%	-19.28%	6.67%	6.79%

Correlation

The correlation between MINV.L and CLMP.L is 0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.06
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2020	0.35

Over the past year, the correlation between MINV.L and CLMP.L has dropped to 0.06 - well below their long-term average of 0.35, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MINV.L vs. CLMP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MINV.L	CLMP.L
Technology	21.3%	27.9%
Financial Services	14.2%	-
Healthcare	13.6%	-
Communication Services	11.9%	-
Consumer Defensive	10.8%	-
Industrials	9.1%	48.3%
Utilities	7.7%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	5.4%	2.8%
Energy	4.2%	-
Basic Materials	1.0%	5.4%
Real Estate	0.7%	-

Return for Risk

MINV.L vs. CLMP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MINV.L

MINV.L Risk / Return Rank: 14
MINV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
MINV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
MINV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 13
MINV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
MINV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 14

CLMP.L

CLMP.L Risk / Return Rank: 34
CLMP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
CLMP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
CLMP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
CLMP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
CLMP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 19

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.

MINV.L vs. CLMP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (MINV.L) and HANetf iClima Global Decarbonisation Enablers UCITS ETF (CLMP.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.

	MINV.L	CLMP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.32	0.88	-0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.53	1.64	-1.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.38	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.41	1.37	-0.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.10	2.18	-1.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MINV.L vs. CLMP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MINV.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.32, which is lower than the CLMP.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MINV.L and CLMP.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

	MINV.L	CLMP.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.32	0.88	-0.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65	-0.01	+0.66
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.66	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.83	0.04	+0.80

Drawdowns

MINV.L vs. CLMP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MINV.L drawdown since its inception was -20.38%, smaller than the maximum CLMP.L drawdown of -48.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MINV.L and CLMP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	MINV.L	CLMP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.38%	-48.75%	+28.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.31%	-29.66%	+23.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.47%	-40.47%	+32.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-10.23%	-48.75%	+38.52%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-20.38%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.60%	-14.71%	+11.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.74%	-23.77%	+20.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.33%	18.73%	-16.40%

Volatility

MINV.L vs. CLMP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (MINV.L) is 2.55%, while HANetf iClima Global Decarbonisation Enablers UCITS ETF (CLMP.L) has a volatility of 6.75%. This indicates that MINV.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLMP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MINV.L	CLMP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.55%	6.75%	-4.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.92%	13.21%	-7.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.92%	46.49%	-38.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.70%	34.90%	-25.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.85%	34.12%	-22.27%

MINV.L vs. CLMP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MINV.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CLMP.L's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

MINV.L vs. CLMP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MINV.L nor CLMP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MINV.L and CLMP.L in my portfolio?

MINV.L and CLMP.L have a correlation of 0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MINV.L or CLMP.L?

On fees, MINV.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MINV.L or CLMP.L?

MINV.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CLMP.L.

What is the main difference between MINV.L and CLMP.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI ACWI NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and HANetf. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MINV.L and 0.65% for CLMP.L.