PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MINV.L vs. TDGB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MINV.L vs. TDGB.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MINV.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF) and TDGB.L (VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds - MINV.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD while TDGB.L tracks the Morningstar Developed Markets Large Cap Dividend Leaders Screened Select Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MINV.L returned 6.32%/yr vs 17.70%/yr for TDGB.L. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MINV.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for TDGB.L.

Performance

MINV.L vs. TDGB.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 VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF (TDGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MINV.L achieves a 1.01% return, which is significantly lower than TDGB.L's 8.92% 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%

TDGB.L

1D
0.48%
1M
0.92%
YTD
8.92%
6M
11.81%
1Y
29.32%
3Y*
20.13%
5Y*
17.70%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
MINV.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF		1.01%3.37%12.86%1.50%1.23%15.98%-1.05%15.99%
TDGB.L
VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF		8.92%30.88%10.65%9.06%22.49%19.59%-5.61%10.74%

Correlation

The correlation between MINV.L and TDGB.L is 0.54, 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

0.54

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

0.53

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

0.56

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2019

0.63

The correlation between MINV.L and TDGB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
MINV.L
TDGB.L

Technology

21.3%
0.3%

Financial Services

14.2%
31.7%

Healthcare

13.6%
14.4%

Communication Services

11.9%
8.7%

Consumer Defensive

10.8%
10.1%

Industrials

9.1%
3.9%

Utilities

7.7%
6.2%

Consumer Cyclical

5.4%
3.8%

Energy

4.2%
19.7%

Basic Materials

1.0%
1.2%

Real Estate

0.7%
0.0%

Technology

MINV.L
21.3%
TDGB.L
0.3%

Financial Services

MINV.L
14.2%
TDGB.L
31.7%

Healthcare

MINV.L
13.6%
TDGB.L
14.4%

Communication Services

MINV.L
11.9%
TDGB.L
8.7%

Consumer Defensive

MINV.L
10.8%
TDGB.L
10.1%

Industrials

MINV.L
9.1%
TDGB.L
3.9%

Utilities

MINV.L
7.7%
TDGB.L
6.2%

Consumer Cyclical

MINV.L
5.4%
TDGB.L
3.8%

Energy

MINV.L
4.2%
TDGB.L
19.7%

Basic Materials

MINV.L
1.0%
TDGB.L
1.2%

Real Estate

MINV.L
0.7%
TDGB.L
0.0%

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 Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF

VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF

Often compared with MINV.L:
MINV.L vs. MVEW.LMINV.L vs. CSH2.LMINV.L vs. FULVXMINV.L vs. MVEA.LMINV.L vs. SPYMINV.L vs. VOOMINV.L vs. AOR
Often compared with TDGB.L:
TDGB.L vs. VHYL.ASTDGB.L vs. SCHDTDGB.L vs. SPYDTDGB.L vs. LDEG.LTDGB.L vs. VHYD.LTDGB.L vs. JEGP.LTDGB.L vs. CSKR.L

Return for Risk

MINV.L vs. TDGB.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: 1414
Overall Rank
MINV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MINV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
MINV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
MINV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
MINV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank
TDGB.L
TDGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
TDGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

MINV.L vs. TDGB.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 VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF (TDGB.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.LTDGB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.32
3.15

-2.82

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.53
4.38

-3.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

1.59

-0.53

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.41

6.26

-5.85

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.10

20.72

-19.62

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. TDGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MINV.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.32, which is lower than the TDGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MINV.L and TDGB.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

MINV.LTDGB.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.32

3.15

-2.82

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

1.55

-0.90

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

0.98

-0.15

Drawdowns

MINV.L vs. TDGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MINV.L drawdown since its inception was -20.38%, smaller than the maximum TDGB.L drawdown of -29.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MINV.L and TDGB.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MINV.LTDGB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.38%

-29.60%

+9.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.31%

-4.66%

-1.65%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.47%

-12.41%

+3.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-10.23%

-12.41%

+2.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.38%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.60%

-1.47%

-2.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.74%

-3.70%

-0.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.33%

1.41%

+0.92%

Volatility

MINV.L vs. TDGB.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (MINV.L) and VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF (TDGB.L) have volatilities of 2.55% and 2.49%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MINV.LTDGB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.55%

2.49%

+0.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.92%

7.01%

-1.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.92%

9.28%

-1.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.70%

11.42%

-1.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.85%

14.44%

-2.59%

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

MINV.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than TDGB.L's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

MINV.L vs. TDGB.L - Dividend Comparison

MINV.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while TDGB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.20%.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
MINV.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
TDGB.L
VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF		3.20%3.50%4.27%4.93%4.40%4.06%4.16%4.52%

Frequently Asked Questions

MINV.L and TDGB.L have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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.

MINV.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for TDGB.L.

MINV.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while TDGB.L tracks Morningstar Developed Markets Large Cap Dividend Leaders Screened Select Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MINV.L and 0.38% for TDGB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MINV.L and TDGB.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