SPGM vs. NZAC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SPGM (SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF) and NZAC (SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF) are both Global Equities funds from State Street - SPGM tracks the MSCI AC World IMI while NZAC tracks the MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SPGM returned 12.95%/yr vs 12.16%/yr for NZAC. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SPGM charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for NZAC.

Performance

SPGM vs. NZAC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM) 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, SPGM achieves a 12.88% return, which is significantly higher than NZAC's 8.83% return. Over the past 10 years, SPGM has outperformed NZAC with an annualized return of 12.95%, while NZAC has yielded a comparatively lower 12.16% annualized return.

SPGM

• 1D: -0.87%
• 1M: 4.94%
• YTD: 12.88%
• 6M: 13.62%
• 1Y: 31.70%
• 3Y*: 21.46%
• 5Y*: 11.48%
• 10Y*: 12.95%

NZAC

• 1D: -0.82%
• 1M: 4.49%
• YTD: 8.83%
• 6M: 9.51%
• 1Y: 24.74%
• 3Y*: 19.06%
• 5Y*: 9.88%
• 10Y*: 12.16%

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

SPGM vs. NZAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SPGM SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF	12.88%	23.62%	16.75%	21.34%	-17.53%	21.13%	15.28%	26.58%	-10.12%	23.26%
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	8.83%	20.55%	16.67%	23.22%	-19.77%	18.35%	17.21%	28.24%	-9.80%	22.93%

Correlation

The correlation between SPGM and NZAC is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 28, 2014	0.82

The correlation between SPGM and NZAC shifts across timeframes, from 0.82 (all time) to 0.96 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SPGM vs. NZAC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SPGM	NZAC
Technology	27.4%	34.3%
Financial Services	16.4%	13.1%
Industrials	13.1%	7.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	8.2%
Communication Services	8.5%	8.5%
Healthcare	8.2%	7.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	1.0%
Energy	4.5%	1.2%
Basic Materials	3.9%	1.9%
Utilities	2.2%	1.4%
Real Estate	1.9%	5.2%

Return for Risk

SPGM vs. NZAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPGM

SPGM Risk / Return Rank: 73
SPGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
SPGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
SPGM Omega Ratio Rank: 74
SPGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
SPGM Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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: 49
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.

SPGM vs. NZAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM) 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.

	SPGM	NZAC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.47	1.92	+0.55
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.39	2.71	+0.67
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.34	+0.11
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.35	2.46	+0.89
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.14	10.68	+4.46
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SPGM vs. NZAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPGM Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is comparable to the NZAC Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPGM 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

	SPGM	NZAC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.47	1.92	+0.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72	0.59	+0.13
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.74	0.71	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.66	0.61	+0.04

Drawdowns

SPGM vs. NZAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPGM drawdown since its inception was -33.97%, roughly equal to the maximum NZAC drawdown of -33.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPGM and NZAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	SPGM	NZAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.97%	-33.72%	-0.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.50%	-10.10%	+0.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.90%	-16.19%	-0.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.93%	-28.31%	+2.38%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.97%	-33.72%	-0.25%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.87%	-0.82%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.81%	-5.32%	+0.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.10%	2.32%	-0.22%

Volatility

SPGM vs. NZAC - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM) has a higher volatility of 3.92% compared to SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC) at 3.72%. This indicates that SPGM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NZAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SPGM	NZAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.92%	3.72%	+0.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.35%	10.34%	+0.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.88%	12.94%	-0.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.03%	16.81%	-0.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.57%	17.14%	+0.43%

SPGM vs. NZAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

SPGM has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than NZAC's 0.12% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

SPGM vs. NZAC - Dividend Comparison

SPGM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.79%, less than NZAC's 2.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	2.04%	1.90%	1.88%	1.65%	1.81%	1.62%	1.59%	2.17%	2.53%	2.20%	2.00%	2.40%
SPGM SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF	1.79%	1.89%	1.98%	2.09%	2.37%	1.94%	1.45%	2.46%	1.89%	2.29%	1.87%	3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SPGM and NZAC in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, SPGM and NZAC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, SPGM or NZAC?

SPGM has higher volatility (3.92%) compared to NZAC (3.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SPGM dropped -33.97% vs NZAC's -33.72%.

Which ETF is better, SPGM or NZAC?

On 10-year performance, SPGM leads with 12.95% vs 12.16% for NZAC. On fees, SPGM is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, NZAC has been the lower-risk option at 3.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SPGM or NZAC?

Over the 10-year period, SPGM has performed better with a 12.95% return vs 12.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SPGM or NZAC?

SPGM is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.12% for NZAC.

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

NZAC has the higher dividend yield at 2.04%, compared with 1.79% for SPGM.

What is the main difference between SPGM and NZAC?

SPGM tracks MSCI AC World IMI, while NZAC tracks MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned Index. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for SPGM and 0.12% for NZAC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SPGM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 1.92), 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.