URTH vs. ACWV
URTH (iShares MSCI World ETF) and ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds from iShares - URTH tracks the MSCI World Index (Net) while ACWV tracks the MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, URTH returned 13.03%/yr vs 7.02%/yr for ACWV. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. URTH charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.
Performance
URTH vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, URTH achieves a 10.01% return, which is significantly higher than ACWV's 3.83% return. Over the past 10 years, URTH has outperformed ACWV with an annualized return of 13.03%, while ACWV has yielded a comparatively lower 7.02% annualized return.
URTH
- 1D
- -0.79%
- 1M
- 1.01%
- 6M
- 7.53%
- YTD
- 10.01%
- 1Y
- 21.11%
- 3Y*
- 18.83%
- 5Y*
- 11.34%
- 10Y*
- 13.03%
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%
URTH vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
URTH iShares MSCI World ETF | 10.01% | 21.36% | 18.66% | 23.95% | -17.97% | 22.27% | 15.78% | 28.15% | -8.56% | 22.95% |
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF | 3.83% | 11.04% | 11.38% | 8.23% | -10.36% | 13.97% | 3.04% | 21.04% | -1.42% | 18.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between URTH and ACWV is 0.57, 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 | 0.57 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2012 | 0.72 |
The correlation between URTH and ACWV shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (1 year) to 0.79 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
URTH vs. ACWV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
URTH
ACWV
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
URTH
ACWV
Financial Services
URTH
ACWV
Industrials
URTH
ACWV
Healthcare
URTH
ACWV
Consumer Cyclical
URTH
ACWV
Communication Services
URTH
ACWV
Consumer Defensive
URTH
ACWV
Energy
URTH
ACWV
Basic Materials
URTH
ACWV
Utilities
URTH
ACWV
Real Estate
URTH
ACWV
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
URTH vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank
URTH
ACWV
URTH vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) 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.
| URTH | ACWV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.86 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.15 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.34 | 1.01 | +1.33 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.17 | 2.89 | +7.27 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
URTH vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum URTH drawdown since its inception was -34.01%, which is greater than ACWV's maximum drawdown of -28.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URTH and ACWV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| URTH | ACWV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.01% | -28.82% | -5.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.06% | -6.37% | -2.69% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.94% | -7.56% | -9.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.05% | -18.14% | -7.91% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.01% | -28.82% | -5.19% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.88% | -1.52% | +0.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.35% | -3.11% | -1.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.08% | 2.22% | -0.14% |
Volatility
URTH vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) has a higher volatility of 4.32% compared to iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) at 3.17%. This indicates that URTH'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| URTH | ACWV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.32% | 3.17% | +1.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.50% | 6.23% | +4.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.81% | 8.07% | +4.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.30% | 10.27% | +6.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.17% | 12.29% | +4.88% |
URTH vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison
URTH has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWV's 0.20% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
URTH vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison
URTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%, 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% |
URTH iShares MSCI World ETF | 1.40% | 1.48% | 1.47% | 1.70% | 1.68% | 1.50% | 1.52% | 2.16% | 2.30% | 1.88% | 2.15% | 2.35% |
Frequently Asked Questions
URTH and ACWV have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
URTH has higher volatility (4.32%) compared to ACWV (3.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URTH dropped -34.01% vs ACWV's -28.82%.
On 10-year performance, URTH leads with 13.03% vs 7.02% 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.
Over the 10-year period, URTH has performed better with a 13.03% return vs 7.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for URTH.
ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 1.40% for URTH.
URTH tracks MSCI World Index (Net), while ACWV tracks MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for URTH and 0.20% for ACWV.
URTH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 0.80), 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.
Find the right allocation for URTH and ACWV
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