PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MXWO.L vs. INFR.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MXWO.L (Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF) and INFR.L (iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - MXWO.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while INFR.L is a Utilities Equities fund tracking the FTSE Global Core Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MXWO.L returned 13.12%/yr vs 7.87%/yr for INFR.L. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MXWO.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for INFR.L.

Performance

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF (MXWO.L) and iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INFR.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

MXWO.L is traded in USD, while INFR.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the INFR.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MXWO.L achieves a 9.99% return, which is significantly higher than INFR.L's 9.25% return. Over the past 10 years, MXWO.L has outperformed INFR.L with an annualized return of 13.12%, while INFR.L has yielded a comparatively lower 7.87% annualized return.

MXWO.L

1D
0.04%
1M
4.21%
YTD
9.99%
6M
11.10%
1Y
26.14%
3Y*
20.86%
5Y*
11.92%
10Y*
13.12%

INFR.L

1D
-1.19%
1M
-3.06%
YTD
9.25%
6M
9.24%
1Y
15.19%
3Y*
12.15%
5Y*
6.48%
10Y*
7.87%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MXWO.L
Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF		9.99%20.83%19.19%24.56%-18.08%22.12%16.27%27.41%-9.08%22.79%
INFR.L
iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		9.25%13.90%9.63%0.06%-5.54%18.46%-1.78%25.66%-1.52%15.44%

Correlation

The correlation between MXWO.L and INFR.L is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.12

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

0.30

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

0.45

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

0.52

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 23, 2011

0.53

Over the past year, the correlation between MXWO.L and INFR.L has dropped to 0.12 - well below their long-term average of 0.53, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
MXWO.L
INFR.L

Technology

28.3%
0.7%

Financial Services

15.7%
0.0%

Industrials

11.4%
20.8%

Consumer Cyclical

9.3%

-

Communication Services

9.3%
1.0%

Healthcare

8.8%

-

Consumer Defensive

5.2%

-

Energy

4.2%
16.4%

Basic Materials

3.3%

-

Utilities

2.7%
56.0%

Real Estate

1.9%
5.0%

Technology

MXWO.L
28.3%
INFR.L
0.7%

Financial Services

MXWO.L
15.7%
INFR.L
0.0%

Industrials

MXWO.L
11.4%
INFR.L
20.8%

Consumer Cyclical

MXWO.L
9.3%
INFR.L

-

Communication Services

MXWO.L
9.3%
INFR.L
1.0%

Healthcare

MXWO.L
8.8%
INFR.L

-

Consumer Defensive

MXWO.L
5.2%
INFR.L

-

Energy

MXWO.L
4.2%
INFR.L
16.4%

Basic Materials

MXWO.L
3.3%
INFR.L

-

Utilities

MXWO.L
2.7%
INFR.L
56.0%

Real Estate

MXWO.L
1.9%
INFR.L
5.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF

iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist)

Often compared with MXWO.L:
MXWO.L vs. MXWS.LMXWO.L vs. SSAC.LMXWO.L vs. IWDA.LMXWO.L vs. URTHMXWO.L vs. VTMXWO.L vs. ^NDXMXWO.L vs. SPY5.L
Often compared with INFR.L:
INFR.L vs. DPGT.LINFR.L vs. IWDA.LINFR.L vs. IUIT.LINFR.L vs. ARCK.LINFR.L vs. FWRG.LINFR.L vs. IDWR.LINFR.L vs. WUTI.L

Return for Risk

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MXWO.L
MXWO.L Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
MXWO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MXWO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
MXWO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
MXWO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
MXWO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank
INFR.L
INFR.L Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
INFR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
INFR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
INFR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
INFR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
INFR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
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.

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF (MXWO.L) and iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INFR.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.

MXWO.LINFR.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.19
1.44

+0.75

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.26
2.06

+1.21

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.26

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.12

2.95

+0.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.34

8.36

+4.97

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

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MXWO.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is higher than the INFR.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MXWO.L and INFR.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

MXWO.LINFR.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.19

1.44

+0.75

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.76

0.47

+0.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.82

0.53

+0.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

0.32

+0.54

Drawdowns

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MXWO.L drawdown since its inception was -33.89%, smaller than the maximum INFR.L drawdown of -48.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MXWO.L and INFR.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MXWO.LINFR.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.89%

-48.40%

+14.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.34%

-5.13%

-3.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.85%

-14.58%

-3.27%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.80%

-21.88%

-3.92%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.89%

-34.60%

+0.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.45%

-3.68%

+3.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.31%

-9.57%

+5.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.95%

1.81%

+0.14%

Volatility

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF (MXWO.L) is 3.32%, while iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INFR.L) has a volatility of 3.57%. This indicates that MXWO.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than INFR.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MXWO.LINFR.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.32%

3.57%

-0.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.15%

8.67%

+0.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.88%

10.51%

+1.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.75%

13.70%

+2.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.93%

14.79%

+1.14%

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MXWO.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than INFR.L's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

MXWO.L vs. INFR.L - Dividend Comparison

MXWO.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while INFR.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
INFR.L
iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		2.82%2.97%2.96%3.02%2.54%2.60%2.84%2.70%2.99%3.51%3.45%4.75%
MXWO.L
Invesco MSCI World UCITS 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

MXWO.L and INFR.L have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MXWO.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MXWO.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for INFR.L.

MXWO.L is categorized as Global Equities, while INFR.L is Utilities Equities. MXWO.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while INFR.L tracks FTSE Global Core Infrastructure Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for MXWO.L and 0.65% for INFR.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MXWO.L and INFR.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