QWLD vs. NZAC

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

QWLD (SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF) and NZAC (SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QWLD is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD), while NZAC is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QWLD returned 11.67%/yr vs 12.11%/yr for NZAC. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QWLD charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for NZAC.

Performance

QWLD vs. NZAC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QWLD achieves a 7.11% return, which is significantly lower than NZAC's 9.25% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with QWLD having a 11.67% annualized return and NZAC not far ahead at 12.11%.

QWLD

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: 2.38%
• YTD: 7.11%
• 6M: 7.83%
• 1Y: 17.61%
• 3Y*: 16.69%
• 5Y*: 10.08%
• 10Y*: 11.67%

NZAC

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 3.97%
• YTD: 9.25%
• 6M: 9.90%
• 1Y: 24.37%
• 3Y*: 19.42%
• 5Y*: 9.97%
• 10Y*: 12.11%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QWLD vs. NZAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	7.11%	17.93%	14.44%	19.59%	-13.30%	21.57%	10.24%	27.59%	-7.02%	22.44%
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	9.25%	20.55%	16.67%	23.22%	-19.77%	18.35%	17.21%	28.24%	-9.80%	22.93%

Correlation

The correlation between QWLD and NZAC is 0.84, 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	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.91
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 28, 2014	0.78

The correlation between QWLD and NZAC shifts across timeframes, from 0.78 (all time) to 0.91 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QWLD vs. NZAC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QWLD	NZAC
Technology	22.3%	34.3%
Financial Services	13.8%	13.1%
Healthcare	12.6%	7.8%
Communication Services	9.6%	8.5%
Industrials	8.6%	7.3%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	1.0%
Consumer Cyclical	5.0%	8.2%
Energy	4.5%	1.2%
Utilities	3.7%	1.4%
Basic Materials	2.9%	1.9%
Real Estate	0.8%	5.2%

Return for Risk

QWLD vs. NZAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

QWLD

QWLD Risk / Return Rank: 53
QWLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
QWLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
QWLD Omega Ratio Rank: 52
QWLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
QWLD Martin Ratio Rank: 58

NZAC

NZAC Risk / Return Rank: 56
NZAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
NZAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
NZAC Omega Ratio Rank: 55
NZAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
NZAC Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

QWLD vs. NZAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). 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.

	QWLD	NZAC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	1.89	-0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.62	2.68	-0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.34	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.31	2.42	-0.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.99	10.52	-0.53
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QWLD vs. NZAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QWLD Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is comparable to the NZAC Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QWLD and NZAC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QWLD	NZAC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.82	1.89	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75	0.60	+0.15
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.77	0.71	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	0.62	+0.08

Drawdowns

QWLD vs. NZAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QWLD drawdown since its inception was -31.89%, smaller than the maximum NZAC drawdown of -33.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QWLD and NZAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	QWLD	NZAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.89%	-33.72%	+1.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.66%	-10.10%	+2.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.40%	-16.19%	+3.79%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.84%	-28.31%	+5.47%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.89%	-33.72%	+1.83%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.03%	-0.43%	+0.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.70%	-5.32%	+1.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.77%	2.32%	-0.55%

Volatility

QWLD vs. NZAC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) is 2.23%, while SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC) has a volatility of 3.65%. This indicates that QWLD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NZAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QWLD	NZAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.23%	3.65%	-1.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.52%	10.35%	-2.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.69%	12.94%	-3.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.52%	16.81%	-3.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.18%	17.14%	-1.96%

QWLD vs. NZAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

QWLD has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than NZAC's 0.12% expense ratio.

Dividends

QWLD vs. NZAC - Dividend Comparison

QWLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, less than NZAC's 2.03% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	2.03%	1.90%	1.88%	1.65%	1.81%	1.62%	1.59%	2.17%	2.53%	2.20%	2.00%	2.40%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	1.83%	1.85%	1.74%	1.78%	2.02%	1.77%	1.77%	2.13%	2.33%	2.73%	2.22%	3.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QWLD and NZAC in my portfolio?

QWLD and NZAC have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QWLD or NZAC?

NZAC has higher volatility (3.65%) compared to QWLD (2.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QWLD dropped -31.89% vs NZAC's -33.72%.

Which ETF is better, QWLD or NZAC?

On 10-year performance, NZAC leads with 12.11% vs 11.67% for QWLD. On fees, NZAC is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, QWLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QWLD or NZAC?

Over the 10-year period, NZAC has performed better with a 12.11% return vs 11.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QWLD or NZAC?

NZAC is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for QWLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QWLD or NZAC?

NZAC has the higher dividend yield at 2.03%, compared with 1.83% for QWLD.

What is the main difference between QWLD and NZAC?

QWLD is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while NZAC is Global Equities. QWLD tracks MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD), while NZAC tracks MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned Index. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for QWLD and 0.12% for NZAC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NZAC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs 1.82), 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.