THMZ vs. ACWV

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

THMZ (Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF) and ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds. THMZ is actively managed, while ACWV is passively managed. Over the past year, THMZ returned 10.99% vs 6.41% for ACWV. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. THMZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.

Performance

THMZ vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF (THMZ) 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, THMZ achieves a 2.80% return, which is significantly lower than ACWV's 3.83% return.

THMZ

• 1D: -1.19%
• 1M: 2.00%
• 6M: -0.07%
• YTD: 2.80%
• 1Y: 10.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ACWV

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 0.92%
• 6M: 2.66%
• YTD: 3.83%
• 1Y: 6.41%
• 3Y*: 9.88%
• 5Y*: 5.49%
• 10Y*: 7.02%

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

THMZ vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
THMZ Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF	2.80%	31.18%
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	3.83%	9.77%

Correlation

The correlation between THMZ and ACWV is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2025	0.51

The correlation between THMZ and ACWV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

THMZ vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank

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

THMZ

THMZ Risk / Return Rank: 22
THMZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
THMZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
THMZ Omega Ratio Rank: 21
THMZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
THMZ Martin Ratio Rank: 24

ACWV

ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 26
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
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.

THMZ vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF (THMZ) 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.

	THMZ	ACWV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.66	0.80	-0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.02	1.18	-0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.15	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.69	1.01	-0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.46	2.89	-0.43

THMZ vs. ACWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current THMZ Sharpe Ratio is 0.66, which is comparable to the ACWV Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of THMZ 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

THMZ vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum THMZ drawdown since its inception was -15.99%, smaller than the maximum ACWV drawdown of -28.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for THMZ and ACWV.

Drawdown Indicators

	THMZ	ACWV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.99%	-28.82%	+12.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.99%	-6.37%	-9.62%
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	-2.02%	-1.52%	-0.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.53%	-3.11%	+0.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.48%	2.22%	+2.26%

Volatility

THMZ vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison

Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF (THMZ) has a higher volatility of 5.73% compared to iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) at 3.17%. This indicates that THMZ'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

	THMZ	ACWV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.73%	3.17%	+2.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.01%	6.23%	+7.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.72%	8.07%	+8.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.03%	10.27%	+8.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.03%	12.29%	+6.74%

THMZ vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison

THMZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWV's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

THMZ vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison

THMZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.24%, less than ACWV's 1.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	1.93%	2.09%	2.33%	2.41%	2.18%	1.92%	1.77%	2.54%	2.32%	2.04%	2.56%	2.28%
THMZ Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF	0.24%	0.30%	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 THMZ and ACWV in my portfolio?

THMZ and ACWV have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, THMZ or ACWV?

THMZ has higher volatility (5.73%) compared to ACWV (3.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, THMZ dropped -15.99% vs ACWV's -28.82%.

Which ETF is better, THMZ or ACWV?

On 1-year performance, THMZ leads with 10.99% vs 6.41% for ACWV. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 3.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, THMZ or ACWV?

Over the 1-year period, THMZ has performed better with a 10.99% return vs 6.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, THMZ or ACWV?

ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for THMZ.

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

ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 0.24% for THMZ.

What is the main difference between THMZ and ACWV?

They also come from different issuers: Lazard and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for THMZ and 0.20% for ACWV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACWV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.80 vs 0.66), 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.