PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Edge S&P 500 Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (MVUS.L) and iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MVUS.L achieves a 4.03% return, which is significantly lower than IWFQ.L's 8.04% return. Over the past 10 years, MVUS.L has underperformed IWFQ.L with an annualized return of 11.19%, while IWFQ.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.11% annualized return.


MVUS.L

1D
-0.44%
1M
4.47%
YTD
4.03%
6M
4.68%
1Y
11.77%
3Y*
11.21%
5Y*
9.95%
10Y*
11.19%

IWFQ.L

1D
-0.16%
1M
2.84%
YTD
8.04%
6M
8.42%
1Y
20.82%
3Y*
15.56%
5Y*
11.23%
10Y*
13.11%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MVUS.L
iShares Edge S&P 500 Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
4.03%3.88%20.71%3.83%-0.36%26.59%3.87%26.86%-0.36%6.22%
IWFQ.L
iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS
8.04%7.40%18.93%19.15%-9.55%25.17%10.93%25.86%-2.34%12.47%

Correlation

The correlation between MVUS.L and IWFQ.L is 0.72, 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

0.72

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

0.77

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

0.80

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 7, 2014

0.87

The correlation between MVUS.L and IWFQ.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (1 year) to 0.87 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MVUS.L
IWFQ.L

Technology

29.0%
32.2%

Financial Services

17.8%
14.1%

Healthcare

13.3%
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

10.4%
5.1%

Consumer Cyclical

6.9%
8.8%

Communication Services

6.5%
9.1%

Industrials

5.7%
9.8%

Energy

5.2%
4.2%

Utilities

2.9%
2.5%

Basic Materials

2.3%
3.3%

Real Estate

0.2%
1.7%

Technology

MVUS.L
29.0%
IWFQ.L
32.2%

Financial Services

MVUS.L
17.8%
IWFQ.L
14.1%

Healthcare

MVUS.L
13.3%
IWFQ.L
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

MVUS.L
10.4%
IWFQ.L
5.1%

Consumer Cyclical

MVUS.L
6.9%
IWFQ.L
8.8%

Communication Services

MVUS.L
6.5%
IWFQ.L
9.1%

Industrials

MVUS.L
5.7%
IWFQ.L
9.8%

Energy

MVUS.L
5.2%
IWFQ.L
4.2%

Utilities

MVUS.L
2.9%
IWFQ.L
2.5%

Basic Materials

MVUS.L
2.3%
IWFQ.L
3.3%

Real Estate

MVUS.L
0.2%
IWFQ.L
1.7%

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

MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MVUS.L
MVUS.L Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
MVUS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MVUS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
MVUS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
MVUS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
MVUS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank

IWFQ.L
IWFQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
IWFQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge S&P 500 Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (MVUS.L) and iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.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.


MVUS.LIWFQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.96

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.40

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.18

2.96

-0.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.82

12.47

-5.65

MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MVUS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the IWFQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MVUS.L and IWFQ.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


MVUS.LIWFQ.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.46

2.13

-0.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

0.59

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

0.76

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.49

0.41

+0.08

Drawdowns

MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MVUS.L drawdown since its inception was -39.22%, roughly equal to the maximum IWFQ.L drawdown of -40.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MVUS.L and IWFQ.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MVUS.LIWFQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.22%

-40.49%

+1.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.39%

-7.01%

+1.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.40%

-20.20%

-0.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.40%

-20.20%

-0.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.85%

-23.91%

-0.94%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.44%

-0.60%

+0.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.21%

-8.99%

+1.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.72%

1.67%

+0.05%

Volatility

MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Edge S&P 500 Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (MVUS.L) and iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L) have volatilities of 2.34% and 2.35%, 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


MVUS.LIWFQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.34%

2.35%

-0.01%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.60%

7.10%

-1.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.05%

9.77%

-1.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.31%

19.18%

-0.87%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.99%

17.33%

-0.34%

MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MVUS.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than IWFQ.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

MVUS.L vs. IWFQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MVUS.L nor IWFQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


MVUS.L and IWFQ.L have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MVUS.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MVUS.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for IWFQ.L.

MVUS.L is categorized as S&P 500, while IWFQ.L is Global Equities. MVUS.L tracks S&P 500 Index, while IWFQ.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for MVUS.L and 0.30% for IWFQ.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MVUS.L and IWFQ.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