SWRD.L vs. ^GSPC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SWRD.L (SPDR MSCI World UCITS ETF) is Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Index, while ^GSPC (S&P 500 Index) is an index. Over the past 5 years, SWRD.L returned 11.96%/yr vs 12.30%/yr for ^GSPC. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.

Performance

SWRD.L vs. ^GSPC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI World UCITS ETF (SWRD.L) and S&P 500 Index (^GSPC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SWRD.L achieves a 9.82% return, which is significantly lower than ^GSPC's 10.35% return.

SWRD.L

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: 3.81%
• YTD: 9.82%
• 6M: 11.31%
• 1Y: 26.51%
• 3Y*: 20.93%
• 5Y*: 11.96%
• 10Y*: —

^GSPC

• 1D: -0.74%
• 1M: 4.90%
• YTD: 10.35%
• 6M: 10.28%
• 1Y: 26.52%
• 3Y*: 20.83%
• 5Y*: 12.30%
• 10Y*: 13.66%

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

SWRD.L vs. ^GSPC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
SWRD.L SPDR MSCI World UCITS ETF	9.82%	21.09%	19.26%	24.41%	-17.81%	22.11%	15.89%	14.63%
^GSPC S&P 500 Index	10.35%	16.39%	23.31%	24.23%	-19.44%	26.89%	16.26%	15.68%

Correlation

The correlation between SWRD.L and ^GSPC is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.58
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2019	0.59

The correlation between SWRD.L and ^GSPC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

SWRD.L vs. ^GSPC — Risk / Return Rank

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

SWRD.L

SWRD.L Risk / Return Rank: 67
SWRD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
SWRD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
SWRD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
SWRD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
SWRD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 71

^GSPC

^GSPC Risk / Return Rank: 73
^GSPC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
^GSPC Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
^GSPC Omega Ratio Rank: 72
^GSPC Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
^GSPC Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

SWRD.L vs. ^GSPC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI World UCITS ETF (SWRD.L) and S&P 500 Index (^GSPC). 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.

	SWRD.L	^GSPC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.23	2.24	-0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.32	3.07	+0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.41	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.18	2.93	+0.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.45	13.52	-0.07
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SWRD.L vs. ^GSPC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SWRD.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is comparable to the ^GSPC Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SWRD.L and ^GSPC, 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

	SWRD.L	^GSPC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.23	2.24	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.77	0.73	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.76	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.83	0.47	+0.35

Drawdowns

SWRD.L vs. ^GSPC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SWRD.L drawdown since its inception was -34.10%, smaller than the maximum ^GSPC drawdown of -56.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SWRD.L and ^GSPC.

Drawdown Indicators

	SWRD.L	^GSPC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.10%	-56.78%	+22.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.31%	-9.10%	+0.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.89%	-18.90%	+2.01%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.54%	-25.43%	-0.11%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.92%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.55%	-0.74%	+0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.02%	-10.72%	+5.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.97%	1.97%	0.00%

Volatility

SWRD.L vs. ^GSPC - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI World UCITS ETF (SWRD.L) has a higher volatility of 3.35% compared to S&P 500 Index (^GSPC) at 2.93%. This indicates that SWRD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ^GSPC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SWRD.L	^GSPC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.35%	2.93%	+0.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.05%	8.99%	+0.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.83%	11.89%	-0.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.52%	16.90%	-1.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.26%	18.06%	-0.80%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SWRD.L and ^GSPC in my portfolio?

SWRD.L and ^GSPC have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.