PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF (MXWS.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MXWS.L achieves a 10.17% return, which is significantly lower than FWRG.L's 12.38% return.


MXWS.L

1D
0.04%
1M
5.20%
YTD
10.17%
6M
10.37%
1Y
27.42%
3Y*
17.75%
5Y*
13.12%
10Y*
14.18%

FWRG.L

1D
0.00%
1M
6.33%
YTD
12.38%
6M
11.63%
1Y
31.35%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
MXWS.L
Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF
10.17%12.63%21.11%8.16%
FWRG.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc
12.37%5.73%22.20%7.05%

Correlation

The correlation between MXWS.L and FWRG.L is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023

0.82

The correlation between MXWS.L and FWRG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MXWS.L
FWRG.L

Technology

28.3%
29.1%

Financial Services

15.7%
16.4%

Industrials

11.4%
11.0%

Consumer Cyclical

9.3%
9.4%

Communication Services

9.3%
8.9%

Healthcare

8.8%
7.6%

Consumer Defensive

5.2%
5.0%

Energy

4.2%
4.3%

Basic Materials

3.3%
3.9%

Utilities

2.7%
2.6%

Real Estate

1.9%
1.9%

Technology

MXWS.L
28.3%
FWRG.L
29.1%

Financial Services

MXWS.L
15.7%
FWRG.L
16.4%

Industrials

MXWS.L
11.4%
FWRG.L
11.0%

Consumer Cyclical

MXWS.L
9.3%
FWRG.L
9.4%

Communication Services

MXWS.L
9.3%
FWRG.L
8.9%

Healthcare

MXWS.L
8.8%
FWRG.L
7.6%

Consumer Defensive

MXWS.L
5.2%
FWRG.L
5.0%

Energy

MXWS.L
4.2%
FWRG.L
4.3%

Basic Materials

MXWS.L
3.3%
FWRG.L
3.9%

Utilities

MXWS.L
2.7%
FWRG.L
2.6%

Real Estate

MXWS.L
1.9%
FWRG.L
1.9%

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

MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MXWS.L
MXWS.L Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
MXWS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MXWS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
MXWS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
MXWS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
MXWS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

FWRG.L
FWRG.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
FWRG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
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.

MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF (MXWS.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.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.


MXWS.LFWRG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.51

1.44

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.17

4.66

-0.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.68

12.25

+4.43

MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MXWS.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.69, which is comparable to the FWRG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MXWS.L and FWRG.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


MXWS.LFWRG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.69

2.45

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.98

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.00

1.10

-0.10

Drawdowns

MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MXWS.L drawdown since its inception was -24.29%, which is greater than FWRG.L's maximum drawdown of -22.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MXWS.L and FWRG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MXWS.LFWRG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.29%

-22.64%

-1.65%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.55%

-6.70%

+0.15%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.29%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.29%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.13%

-0.12%

-0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.25%

-4.29%

+1.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.64%

2.55%

-0.91%

Volatility

MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF (MXWS.L) is 2.51%, while Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L) has a volatility of 3.57%. This indicates that MXWS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FWRG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MXWS.LFWRG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.51%

3.57%

-1.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.41%

9.19%

-1.78%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.16%

12.72%

-2.56%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.33%

14.76%

-1.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.45%

14.76%

+0.69%

MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MXWS.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than FWRG.L's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

MXWS.L vs. FWRG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MXWS.L nor FWRG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


MXWS.L and FWRG.L have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, FWRG.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FWRG.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for MXWS.L.

MXWS.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while FWRG.L tracks FTSE All-World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for MXWS.L and 0.15% for FWRG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MXWS.L and FWRG.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