PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
TDGB.L vs. MINV.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

TDGB.L (VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF) and MINV.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds - TDGB.L tracks the Morningstar Developed Markets Large Cap Dividend Leaders Screened Select Index while MINV.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TDGB.L returned 17.70%/yr vs 6.32%/yr for MINV.L. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TDGB.L charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for MINV.L.

Performance

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF (TDGB.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (MINV.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

TDGB.L is traded in GBP, while MINV.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the MINV.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TDGB.L achieves a 8.92% return, which is significantly higher than MINV.L's 1.01% return.

TDGB.L

1D
0.48%
1M
0.92%
YTD
8.92%
6M
11.81%
1Y
29.32%
3Y*
20.13%
5Y*
17.70%
10Y*
—

MINV.L

1D
0.15%
1M
1.83%
YTD
1.01%
6M
0.93%
1Y
2.57%
3Y*
6.54%
5Y*
6.32%
10Y*
7.86%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
TDGB.L
VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF		8.92%30.88%10.65%9.06%22.49%19.59%-5.61%10.74%
MINV.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF		1.01%3.37%12.86%1.50%1.23%15.98%-1.05%15.99%

Correlation

The correlation between TDGB.L and MINV.L is 0.54, 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

0.54

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.53

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.56

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2019

0.63

The correlation between TDGB.L and MINV.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
TDGB.L
MINV.L

Financial Services

31.7%
14.2%

Energy

19.7%
4.2%

Healthcare

14.4%
13.6%

Consumer Defensive

10.1%
10.8%

Communication Services

8.7%
11.9%

Utilities

6.2%
7.7%

Industrials

3.9%
9.1%

Consumer Cyclical

3.8%
5.4%

Basic Materials

1.2%
1.0%

Technology

0.3%
21.3%

Real Estate

0.0%
0.7%

Financial Services

TDGB.L
31.7%
MINV.L
14.2%

Energy

TDGB.L
19.7%
MINV.L
4.2%

Healthcare

TDGB.L
14.4%
MINV.L
13.6%

Consumer Defensive

TDGB.L
10.1%
MINV.L
10.8%

Communication Services

TDGB.L
8.7%
MINV.L
11.9%

Utilities

TDGB.L
6.2%
MINV.L
7.7%

Industrials

TDGB.L
3.9%
MINV.L
9.1%

Consumer Cyclical

TDGB.L
3.8%
MINV.L
5.4%

Basic Materials

TDGB.L
1.2%
MINV.L
1.0%

Technology

TDGB.L
0.3%
MINV.L
21.3%

Real Estate

TDGB.L
0.0%
MINV.L
0.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF

iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF

Often compared with TDGB.L:
TDGB.L vs. VHYL.ASTDGB.L vs. SCHDTDGB.L vs. SPYDTDGB.L vs. LDEG.LTDGB.L vs. VHYD.LTDGB.L vs. JEGP.LTDGB.L vs. CSKR.L
Often compared with MINV.L:
MINV.L vs. MVEW.LMINV.L vs. CSH2.LMINV.L vs. FULVXMINV.L vs. MVEA.LMINV.L vs. SPYMINV.L vs. VOOMINV.L vs. AOR

Return for Risk

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
TDGB.L
TDGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
TDGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank
MINV.L
MINV.L Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
MINV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MINV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
MINV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
MINV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
MINV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF (TDGB.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (MINV.L). 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.

TDGB.LMINV.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.15
0.32

+2.82

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.38
0.53

+3.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.59

1.06

+0.53

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.26

0.41

+5.85

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

20.72

1.10

+19.62

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TDGB.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.15, which is higher than the MINV.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TDGB.L and MINV.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

TDGB.LMINV.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.15

0.32

+2.82

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.55

0.65

+0.90

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.66

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.98

0.83

+0.15

Drawdowns

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TDGB.L drawdown since its inception was -29.60%, which is greater than MINV.L's maximum drawdown of -20.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TDGB.L and MINV.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

TDGB.LMINV.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.60%

-20.38%

-9.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.66%

-6.31%

+1.65%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.41%

-8.47%

-3.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.41%

-10.23%

-2.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-20.38%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.47%

-3.60%

+2.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.70%

-3.74%

+0.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.41%

2.33%

-0.92%

Volatility

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF (TDGB.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (MINV.L) have volatilities of 2.49% and 2.55%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

TDGB.LMINV.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.49%

2.55%

-0.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.01%

5.92%

+1.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.28%

7.92%

+1.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.42%

9.70%

+1.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.44%

11.85%

+2.59%

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

TDGB.L has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than MINV.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

TDGB.L vs. MINV.L - Dividend Comparison

TDGB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.20%, while MINV.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
MINV.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
TDGB.L
VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF		3.20%3.50%4.27%4.93%4.40%4.06%4.16%4.52%

Frequently Asked Questions

TDGB.L and MINV.L have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MINV.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MINV.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for TDGB.L.

TDGB.L tracks Morningstar Developed Markets Large Cap Dividend Leaders Screened Select Index, while MINV.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for TDGB.L and 0.35% for MINV.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for TDGB.L and MINV.L

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