PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
URTH vs. ACWV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

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.

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

URTH vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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

30.7%
25.8%

Financial Services

15.9%
13.2%

Industrials

11.0%
8.1%

Healthcare

9.1%
13.0%

Consumer Cyclical

8.8%
5.1%

Communication Services

8.0%
11.9%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
9.8%

Energy

3.6%
3.7%

Basic Materials

3.2%
1.5%

Utilities

2.8%
7.3%

Real Estate

1.7%
0.6%

Technology

URTH
30.7%
ACWV
25.8%

Financial Services

URTH
15.9%
ACWV
13.2%

Industrials

URTH
11.0%
ACWV
8.1%

Healthcare

URTH
9.1%
ACWV
13.0%

Consumer Cyclical

URTH
8.8%
ACWV
5.1%

Communication Services

URTH
8.0%
ACWV
11.9%

Consumer Defensive

URTH
4.9%
ACWV
9.8%

Energy

URTH
3.6%
ACWV
3.7%

Basic Materials

URTH
3.2%
ACWV
1.5%

Utilities

URTH
2.8%
ACWV
7.3%

Real Estate

URTH
1.7%
ACWV
0.6%

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

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

URTH
URTH Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
URTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
URTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
URTH Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
URTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
URTH Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWV
ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
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.

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.


URTHACWVDifference
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

URTH vs. ACWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URTH Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is higher than the ACWV Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. 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.


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


URTHACWVDifference

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

-0.88%

-1.52%

+0.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.35%

-3.11%

-1.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


URTHACWVDifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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