RING vs. ACWI

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RING (iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RING is a Gold fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index, while ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RING returned 12.92%/yr vs 13.09%/yr for ACWI. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RING charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.

Performance

RING vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RING achieves a -8.53% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 9.86% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with RING having a 12.92% annualized return and ACWI not far ahead at 13.09%.

RING

• 1D: -4.54%
• 1M: -9.24%
• YTD: -8.53%
• 6M: -13.08%
• 1Y: 52.30%
• 3Y*: 44.79%
• 5Y*: 20.81%
• 10Y*: 12.92%

ACWI

• 1D: -2.00%
• 1M: -0.35%
• YTD: 9.86%
• 6M: 9.11%
• 1Y: 25.60%
• 3Y*: 20.00%
• 5Y*: 10.74%
• 10Y*: 13.09%

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

RING vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF	-8.53%	164.72%	15.98%	12.29%	-15.40%	-7.46%	24.98%	49.92%	-13.14%	10.24%
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	9.86%	22.41%	17.45%	22.27%	-18.39%	18.66%	16.34%	26.59%	-9.19%	24.33%

Correlation

The correlation between RING and ACWI is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.39
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.36
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2012	0.25

Over the past year, RING and ACWI have become more correlated (0.47) than their long-term average of 0.25, meaning their price movements have been converging.

RING vs. ACWI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RING	ACWI
Basic Materials	99.7%	3.6%
Financial Services	0.1%	15.9%
Communication Services	-	8.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.7%
Energy	-	3.6%
Healthcare	-	7.7%
Industrials	-	10.3%
Real Estate	-	1.6%
Technology	-	33.0%
Utilities	-	2.7%

Return for Risk

RING vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

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

RING

RING Risk / Return Rank: 30
RING Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
RING Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
RING Omega Ratio Rank: 32
RING Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
RING Martin Ratio Rank: 29

ACWI

ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 58
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 58
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

RING vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.

	RING	ACWI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	1.89	-0.79
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.53	2.60	-1.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.34	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.47	2.64	-1.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.91	11.51	-7.59

RING vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RING Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RING and ACWI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RING vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RING drawdown since its inception was -79.47%, which is greater than ACWI's maximum drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RING and ACWI.

Drawdown Indicators

	RING	ACWI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-79.47%	-56.00%	-23.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-35.72%	-9.73%	-25.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.72%	-16.55%	-19.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-47.94%	-26.42%	-21.52%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-52.04%	-33.53%	-18.51%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-32.25%	-2.83%	-29.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-47.33%	-8.59%	-38.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.40%	2.23%	+11.17%

Volatility

RING vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) has a higher volatility of 17.22% compared to iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) at 5.57%. This indicates that RING's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RING	ACWI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.22%	5.57%	+11.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.95%	11.38%	+28.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	48.04%	13.64%	+34.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.94%	16.20%	+20.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.73%	17.08%	+19.65%

RING vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

RING has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

RING vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

RING's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, less than ACWI's 1.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	1.45%	1.55%	1.70%	1.88%	1.79%	1.71%	1.43%	2.33%	2.18%	1.94%	2.19%	2.56%
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF	1.35%	0.84%	1.43%	2.01%	2.29%	2.38%	0.83%	0.83%	0.70%	0.42%	1.41%	0.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RING and ACWI in my portfolio?

RING and ACWI have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RING or ACWI?

RING has higher volatility (17.22%) compared to ACWI (5.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RING dropped -79.47% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

Which ETF is better, RING or ACWI?

On 10-year performance, ACWI leads with 13.09% vs 12.92% for RING. On fees, ACWI is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, ACWI has been the lower-risk option at 5.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RING or ACWI?

Over the 10-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 13.09% return vs 12.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RING or ACWI?

ACWI is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for RING.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RING or ACWI?

ACWI has the higher dividend yield at 1.45%, compared with 1.35% for RING.

What is the main difference between RING and ACWI?

RING is categorized as Gold, while ACWI is Global Equities. RING tracks MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RING and 0.32% for ACWI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs 1.09), 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.