TGLB vs. ACWV

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

TGLB (T. Rowe Price Global Equity ETF) and ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Over the past year, TGLB returned 12.65% vs 5.99% for ACWV. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TGLB charges 0.46%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.

Performance

TGLB vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in T. Rowe Price Global Equity ETF (TGLB) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TGLB achieves a 10.62% return, which is significantly higher than ACWV's 3.37% return.

TGLB

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: -0.46%
• 6M: 8.63%
• YTD: 10.62%
• 1Y: 12.65%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.06%

ACWV

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 2.00%
• 6M: 2.51%
• YTD: 3.37%
• 1Y: 5.99%
• 3Y*: 9.33%
• 5Y*: 5.45%
• 10Y*: 6.94%
• ALL TIME*: 8.60%

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

TGLB vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TGLB T. Rowe Price Global Equity ETF	10.62%	3.99%
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	3.37%	2.65%

Correlation

The correlation between TGLB and ACWV is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.47

TGLB vs. ACWV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TGLB	ACWV
Technology	34.3%	25.3%
Financial Services	18.1%	13.5%
Communication Services	11.5%	11.3%
Industrials	8.6%	8.1%
Consumer Cyclical	7.8%	5.3%
Healthcare	7.2%	13.8%
Basic Materials	4.8%	1.5%
Energy	4.0%	3.5%
Utilities	2.4%	7.5%
Consumer Defensive	1.2%	9.7%
Real Estate	-	0.6%

Return for Risk

TGLB vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank

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

TGLB

TGLB Risk / Return Rank: 34
TGLB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
TGLB Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
TGLB Omega Ratio Rank: 31
TGLB Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
TGLB Martin Ratio Rank: 40

ACWV

ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 26
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 25
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

TGLB vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Global Equity ETF (TGLB) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV). 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.

	TGLB	ACWV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.88	0.75	+0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.30	1.12	+0.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.14	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.30	0.94	+0.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.58	2.68	+1.90

TGLB vs. ACWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TGLB Sharpe Ratio is 0.88, which is comparable to the ACWV Sharpe Ratio of 0.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TGLB and ACWV, 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

TGLB vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TGLB drawdown since its inception was -9.78%, smaller than the maximum ACWV drawdown of -28.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TGLB and ACWV.

Drawdown Indicators

	TGLB	ACWV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.78%	-28.82%	+19.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.78%	-6.37%	-3.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-7.56%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-18.14%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-28.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.30%	-1.96%	-0.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.79%	-3.11%	+1.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.77%	2.24%	+0.53%

Volatility

TGLB vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison

T. Rowe Price Global Equity ETF (TGLB) has a higher volatility of 3.85% compared to iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) at 2.99%. This indicates that TGLB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TGLB	ACWV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.85%	2.99%	+0.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.11%	6.26%	+5.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.42%	8.03%	+6.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.14%	10.28%	+3.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.14%	12.29%	+1.85%

TGLB vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison

TGLB has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWV's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

TGLB vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison

TGLB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.18%, less than ACWV's 1.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	1.94%	2.09%	2.33%	2.41%	2.18%	1.92%	1.77%	2.54%	2.32%	2.04%	2.56%	2.28%
TGLB T. Rowe Price Global Equity ETF	0.18%	0.20%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TGLB and ACWV in my portfolio?

TGLB and ACWV have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TGLB or ACWV?

TGLB has higher volatility (3.85%) compared to ACWV (2.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TGLB dropped -9.78% vs ACWV's -28.82%.

Which ETF is better, TGLB or ACWV?

On 1-year performance, TGLB leads with 12.65% vs 5.99% for ACWV. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 2.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TGLB or ACWV?

Over the 1-year period, TGLB has performed better with a 12.65% return vs 5.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TGLB or ACWV?

ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.46% for TGLB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TGLB or ACWV?

ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.94%, compared with 0.18% for TGLB.

What is the main difference between TGLB and ACWV?

They also come from different issuers: T. Rowe Price and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for TGLB and 0.20% for ACWV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TGLB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.88 vs 0.75), 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.