NZAC vs. IMFL
NZAC (SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF) and IMFL (Invesco International Developed Dynamic Multifactor ETF) are both Global Equities funds - NZAC tracks the MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned Index while IMFL tracks the FTSE Developed ex US Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, NZAC returned 9.09%/yr vs 8.43%/yr for IMFL. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NZAC charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for IMFL.
Performance
NZAC vs. IMFL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NZAC achieves a 5.64% return, which is significantly lower than IMFL's 15.49% return.
NZAC
- 1D
- -0.35%
- 1M
- -1.61%
- YTD
- 5.64%
- 6M
- 4.67%
- 1Y
- 18.44%
- 3Y*
- 17.67%
- 5Y*
- 9.09%
- 10Y*
- 12.14%
IMFL
- 1D
- 0.88%
- 1M
- 0.01%
- YTD
- 15.49%
- 6M
- 14.99%
- 1Y
- 28.76%
- 3Y*
- 16.63%
- 5Y*
- 8.43%
- 10Y*
- —
NZAC vs. IMFL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF | 5.64% | 20.55% | 16.67% | 23.22% | -19.77% | 13.46% |
IMFL Invesco International Developed Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 15.49% | 30.89% | -3.57% | 25.51% | -17.32% | 7.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between NZAC and IMFL is 0.78, 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 | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2021 | 0.79 |
The correlation between NZAC and IMFL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
NZAC vs. IMFL — Risk / Return Rank
NZAC
IMFL
NZAC vs. IMFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC) and Invesco International Developed Dynamic Multifactor ETF (IMFL). 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.
| NZAC | IMFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.44 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.31 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.83 | 2.45 | -0.62 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.66 | 8.58 | -0.92 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NZAC vs. IMFL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NZAC drawdown since its inception was -33.72%, roughly equal to the maximum IMFL drawdown of -33.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NZAC and IMFL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NZAC | IMFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.72% | -33.26% | -0.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.10% | -11.77% | +1.67% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.19% | -13.52% | -2.67% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.31% | -33.26% | +4.95% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.72% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.72% | -2.50% | -1.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.31% | -7.18% | +1.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.41% | 3.36% | -0.95% |
Volatility
NZAC vs. IMFL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC) is 5.41%, while Invesco International Developed Dynamic Multifactor ETF (IMFL) has a volatility of 6.66%. This indicates that NZAC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IMFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NZAC | IMFL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.41% | 6.66% | -1.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.32% | 14.31% | -2.99% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.69% | 16.76% | -3.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.94% | 16.23% | +0.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.13% | 16.13% | +1.00% |
NZAC vs. IMFL - Expense Ratio Comparison
NZAC has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than IMFL's 0.34% expense ratio.
Dividends
NZAC vs. IMFL - Dividend Comparison
NZAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.10%, less than IMFL's 2.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IMFL Invesco International Developed Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 2.93% | 2.88% | 3.56% | 3.85% | 3.35% | 3.94% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF | 2.10% | 1.90% | 1.88% | 1.65% | 1.81% | 1.62% | 1.59% | 2.17% | 2.53% | 2.20% | 2.00% | 2.40% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NZAC and IMFL have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IMFL has higher volatility (6.66%) compared to NZAC (5.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NZAC dropped -33.72% vs IMFL's -33.26%.
On 5-year performance, NZAC leads with 9.09% vs 8.43% for IMFL. On fees, NZAC is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, NZAC has been the lower-risk option at 5.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, NZAC has performed better with a 9.09% return vs 8.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NZAC is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for IMFL.
IMFL has the higher dividend yield at 2.93%, compared with 2.10% for NZAC.
NZAC tracks MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned Index, while IMFL tracks FTSE Developed ex US Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for NZAC and 0.34% for IMFL.
IMFL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.36), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for NZAC and IMFL
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