MNVT vs. ACWV
MNVT (Moonvest ETF) and ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds. MNVT is actively managed, while ACWV is passively managed. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MNVT charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.
Performance
MNVT vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
MNVT
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- -14.18%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ACWV
- 1D
- 0.32%
- 1M
- -0.42%
- YTD
- 2.47%
- 6M
- 2.47%
- 1Y
- 3.41%
- 3Y*
- 9.62%
- 5Y*
- 5.36%
- 10Y*
- 6.97%
MNVT vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
MNVT Moonvest ETF | 19.73% |
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF | 0.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between MNVT and ACWV is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2026 | 0.40 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
MNVT vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank
MNVT
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ACWV
MNVT vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Moonvest ETF (MNVT) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| MNVT | ACWV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.08 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 0.54 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 1.54 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MNVT vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MNVT drawdown since its inception was -18.41%, smaller than the maximum ACWV drawdown of -28.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNVT and ACWV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MNVT | ACWV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.41% | -28.82% | +10.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -6.37% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -7.56% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -18.14% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -28.82% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.18% | -2.81% | -11.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.06% | -3.11% | -2.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.22% | — |
Volatility
MNVT vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MNVT | ACWV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.18% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 6.14% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 47.37% | 8.02% | +39.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 47.37% | 10.27% | +37.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 47.37% | 12.29% | +35.08% |
MNVT vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison
MNVT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWV's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
MNVT vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison
MNVT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ACWV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF | 1.96% | 2.09% | 2.33% | 2.41% | 2.18% | 1.92% | 1.77% | 2.54% | 2.32% | 2.04% | 2.56% | 2.28% |
MNVT Moonvest ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MNVT and ACWV have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MNVT.
ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.96%, compared with 0.00% for MNVT.
They also come from different issuers: Moonvest and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for MNVT and 0.20% for ACWV.
Find the right allocation for MNVT and ACWV
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