URTH vs. ACWV

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

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 13.05%/yr vs 7.22%/yr for ACWV. Their 0.72 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. URTH charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.

Performance

URTH vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) 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, URTH achieves a 11.55% return, which is significantly higher than ACWV's 5.77% return. Over the past 10 years, URTH has outperformed ACWV with an annualized return of 13.05%, while ACWV has yielded a comparatively lower 7.22% annualized return.

URTH

• 1D: 1.22%
• 1M: 1.58%
• 6M: 8.69%
• YTD: 11.55%
• 1Y: 23.64%
• 3Y*: 19.83%
• 5Y*: 11.46%
• 10Y*: 13.05%
• ALL TIME*: 12.26%

ACWV

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 2.00%
• 6M: 3.53%
• YTD: 5.77%
• 1Y: 8.71%
• 3Y*: 10.89%
• 5Y*: 5.71%
• 10Y*: 7.22%
• ALL TIME*: 8.75%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	$13.15M	$11.49M	$12.64M
URTH iShares MSCI World ETF	$88.61M	$87.13M	$139.76M

URTH vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
URTH iShares MSCI World ETF	11.55%	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	5.77%	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 0.53, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.53
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.63
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.74
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	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 0.53 (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	30.9%	25.3%
Financial Services	15.7%	13.5%
Industrials	11.4%	8.1%
Healthcare	9.1%	13.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.9%	5.3%
Communication Services	8.2%	11.3%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	9.7%
Energy	3.6%	3.5%
Basic Materials	3.1%	1.5%
Utilities	2.5%	7.5%
Real Estate	1.7%	0.6%

Return for Risk

URTH vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

URTH

URTH Risk / Return Rank: 78
URTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
URTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
URTH Omega Ratio Rank: 77
URTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
URTH Martin Ratio Rank: 83

ACWV

ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 41
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 42
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 37

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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 ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	1.09	+0.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.54	1.63	+0.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.20	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.62	1.37	+1.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.33	3.90	+7.43

URTH vs. ACWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URTH Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is higher than the ACWV Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URTH 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

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	URTH	ACWV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest 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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.34%	+0.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.34%	-3.10%	-1.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.09%	2.24%	-0.15%

Volatility

URTH vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) has a higher volatility of 3.77% compared to iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) at 2.32%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	URTH	ACWV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.77%	2.32%	+1.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.68%	6.41%	+4.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.05%	8.05%	+5.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.31%	10.30%	+6.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.20%	12.30%	+4.90%

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 1.38%, less than ACWV's 1.90% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF	1.90%	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	1.38%	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

Can I hold both URTH and ACWV in my portfolio?

URTH and ACWV have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, URTH or ACWV?

URTH has higher volatility (3.77%) compared to ACWV (2.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URTH dropped -34.01% vs ACWV's -28.82%.

Which ETF is better, URTH or ACWV?

On 10-year performance, URTH leads with 13.05% vs 7.22% for ACWV. On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 2.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, URTH or ACWV?

Over the 10-year period, URTH has performed better with a 13.05% return vs 7.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, URTH or ACWV?

ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for URTH.

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

ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.90%, compared with 1.38% for URTH.

What is the main difference between URTH and ACWV?

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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

URTH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 1.09), 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.