PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

TSGB.L (VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A) and IWVL.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both Global Equities funds - TSGB.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD while IWVL.L tracks the MSCI World Enhanced Value Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TSGB.L returned 12.11%/yr vs 17.53%/yr for IWVL.L. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TSGB.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for IWVL.L.

Performance

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A (TSGB.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWVL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

TSGB.L is traded in GBP, while IWVL.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IWVL.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TSGB.L achieves a 12.75% return, which is significantly lower than IWVL.L's 34.80% return.

TSGB.L

1D
0.08%
1M
4.90%
YTD
12.75%
6M
13.89%
1Y
28.93%
3Y*
17.68%
5Y*
12.11%
10Y*
—

IWVL.L

1D
-0.68%
1M
11.30%
YTD
34.80%
6M
37.14%
1Y
67.86%
3Y*
27.07%
5Y*
17.53%
10Y*
13.70%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
TSGB.L
VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A		12.75%19.46%12.13%14.14%-7.29%19.61%9.42%11.77%
IWVL.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		34.80%30.41%6.96%13.56%0.94%21.25%-6.50%7.33%

Correlation

The correlation between TSGB.L and IWVL.L is 0.79, 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

0.79

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

0.79

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

0.79

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

0.81

The correlation between TSGB.L and IWVL.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
TSGB.L
IWVL.L

Financial Services

29.4%
14.8%

Technology

23.6%
33.9%

Healthcare

12.7%
8.8%

Industrials

11.7%
11.3%

Consumer Cyclical

7.4%
7.9%

Communication Services

7.0%
7.6%

Basic Materials

2.7%
3.0%

Real Estate

2.6%
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

1.5%
4.5%

Utilities

1.1%
2.5%

Energy

0.4%
3.8%

Financial Services

TSGB.L
29.4%
IWVL.L
14.8%

Technology

TSGB.L
23.6%
IWVL.L
33.9%

Healthcare

TSGB.L
12.7%
IWVL.L
8.8%

Industrials

TSGB.L
11.7%
IWVL.L
11.3%

Consumer Cyclical

TSGB.L
7.4%
IWVL.L
7.9%

Communication Services

TSGB.L
7.0%
IWVL.L
7.6%

Basic Materials

TSGB.L
2.7%
IWVL.L
3.0%

Real Estate

TSGB.L
2.6%
IWVL.L
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

TSGB.L
1.5%
IWVL.L
4.5%

Utilities

TSGB.L
1.1%
IWVL.L
2.5%

Energy

TSGB.L
0.4%
IWVL.L
3.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A

iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

Often compared with TSGB.L:
TSGB.L vs. AEME.LTSGB.L vs. PQVG.LTSGB.L vs. USDV.LTSGB.L vs. VDIV.DETSGB.L vs. VEUR.LTSGB.L vs. ISF.LTSGB.L vs. ISPA.DE
Often compared with IWVL.L:
IWVL.L vs. VWRA.LIWVL.L vs. IWDA.ASIWVL.L vs. IWQU.LIWVL.L vs. DFIVIWVL.L vs. VOOIWVL.L vs. URTHIWVL.L vs. VT

Return for Risk

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
TSGB.L
TSGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
TSGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TSGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
TSGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
TSGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
TSGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank
IWVL.L
IWVL.L Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
IWVL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWVL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWVL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
IWVL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWVL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
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.

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A (TSGB.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWVL.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.

TSGB.LIWVL.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.44
4.57

-2.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.49
6.11

-2.62

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.85

-0.39

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.34

8.64

-5.30

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.99

36.13

-23.14

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

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TSGB.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.44, which is lower than the IWVL.L Sharpe Ratio of 4.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TSGB.L and IWVL.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

TSGB.LIWVL.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.44

4.57

-2.13

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.94

1.22

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.85

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.82

0.75

+0.06

Drawdowns

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TSGB.L drawdown since its inception was -26.20%, smaller than the maximum IWVL.L drawdown of -28.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TSGB.L and IWVL.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

TSGB.LIWVL.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.20%

-28.56%

+2.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.80%

-7.82%

-0.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.64%

-14.14%

-2.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.64%

-14.14%

-2.50%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-28.56%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.01%

-0.68%

+0.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.41%

-4.52%

+1.11%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.26%

1.87%

+0.39%

Volatility

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A (TSGB.L) is 3.24%, while iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWVL.L) has a volatility of 6.17%. This indicates that TSGB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWVL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

TSGB.LIWVL.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.24%

6.17%

-2.93%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.65%

12.59%

-2.94%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.04%

14.78%

-2.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.92%

14.34%

-1.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.93%

16.05%

-1.12%

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

TSGB.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than IWVL.L's 0.25% 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

TSGB.L vs. IWVL.L - Dividend Comparison

TSGB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, while IWVL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021
IWVL.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
TSGB.L
VanEck Sustainable World Equal Weight UCITS ETF A		2.11%2.23%2.63%2.56%2.67%1.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

TSGB.L and IWVL.L have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, TSGB.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

TSGB.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for IWVL.L.

TSGB.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while IWVL.L tracks MSCI World Enhanced Value Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for TSGB.L and 0.25% for IWVL.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for TSGB.L and IWVL.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