PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

MVOL.L vs. TDGB.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MVOL.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS) and TDGB.L (VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds - MVOL.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, MVOL.L returned 5.18%/yr vs 16.46%/yr for TDGB.L. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MVOL.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for TDGB.L.

Performance

MVOL.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 (MVOL.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

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MVOL.L achieves a 0.67% return, which is significantly lower than TDGB.L's 8.65% return.

MVOL.L

1D
0.04%
1M
0.76%
YTD
0.67%
6M
1.44%
1Y
1.44%
3Y*
9.30%
5Y*
5.18%
10Y*
7.05%

TDGB.L

1D
0.53%
1M
0.06%
YTD
8.65%
6M
12.64%
1Y
28.08%
3Y*
23.22%
5Y*
16.46%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
MVOL.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS		0.67%11.02%11.08%7.28%-9.62%14.65%2.56%18.59%
TDGB.L
VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF		8.65%40.76%8.81%14.81%9.40%18.51%-2.72%14.01%

Correlation

The correlation between MVOL.L and TDGB.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

0.61

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

0.65

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

0.65

The correlation between MVOL.L and TDGB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
MVOL.L
TDGB.L

Technology

20.1%
0.3%

Financial Services

14.0%
31.7%

Healthcare

13.8%
14.4%

Communication Services

12.1%
8.7%

Consumer Defensive

10.9%
10.1%

Industrials

9.2%
3.9%

Utilities

8.0%
6.2%

Consumer Cyclical

5.6%
3.8%

Energy

4.5%
19.7%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.2%

Real Estate

0.7%
0.0%

Technology

MVOL.L
20.1%
TDGB.L
0.3%

Financial Services

MVOL.L
14.0%
TDGB.L
31.7%

Healthcare

MVOL.L
13.8%
TDGB.L
14.4%

Communication Services

MVOL.L
12.1%
TDGB.L
8.7%

Consumer Defensive

MVOL.L
10.9%
TDGB.L
10.1%

Industrials

MVOL.L
9.2%
TDGB.L
3.9%

Utilities

MVOL.L
8.0%
TDGB.L
6.2%

Consumer Cyclical

MVOL.L
5.6%
TDGB.L
3.8%

Energy

MVOL.L
4.5%
TDGB.L
19.7%

Basic Materials

MVOL.L
1.1%
TDGB.L
1.2%

Real Estate

MVOL.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

VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF

Often compared with MVOL.L:
MVOL.L vs. ACWVMVOL.L vs. IWDA.LMVOL.L vs. XDEB.DEMVOL.L vs. VOOMVOL.L vs. XDEM.LMVOL.L vs. USMVMVOL.L vs. SLXX.L
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

MVOL.L vs. TDGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MVOL.L
MVOL.L Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
MVOL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
MVOL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
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.

MVOL.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 (MVOL.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.

MVOL.LTDGB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.19
2.53

-2.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.31
3.42

-3.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.04

1.46

-0.42

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.25

5.52

-5.27

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.61

15.71

-15.10

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

MVOL.L vs. TDGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MVOL.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.19, which is lower than the TDGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MVOL.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

MVOL.LTDGB.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.19

2.53

-2.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

1.16

-0.67

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.73

0.88

-0.15

Drawdowns

MVOL.L vs. TDGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MVOL.L drawdown since its inception was -28.82%, smaller than the maximum TDGB.L drawdown of -37.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MVOL.L and TDGB.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MVOL.LTDGB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.82%

-37.43%

+8.61%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.78%

-5.06%

-0.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.14%

-13.67%

+5.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.52%

-18.93%

+0.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.82%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.86%

-1.86%

-2.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.34%

-4.33%

+0.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.36%

1.78%

+0.58%

Volatility

MVOL.L vs. TDGB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS (MVOL.L) is 2.01%, while VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF (TDGB.L) has a volatility of 2.78%. This indicates that MVOL.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TDGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MVOL.LTDGB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.01%

2.78%

-0.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.58%

8.06%

-2.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.74%

11.05%

-3.31%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.64%

14.21%

-3.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.65%

16.79%

-5.14%

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

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

Dividends

MVOL.L vs. TDGB.L - Dividend Comparison

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

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
MVOL.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS		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

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

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

MVOL.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 MVOL.L and 0.38% for TDGB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MVOL.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