PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
URTH vs. IWFQ.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

URTH vs. IWFQ.L

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

URTH (iShares MSCI World ETF) and IWFQ.L (iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS) are both Global Equities funds from iShares - URTH tracks the MSCI World Index (Net) while IWFQ.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, URTH returned 13.44%/yr vs 12.56%/yr for IWFQ.L. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. URTH charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for IWFQ.L.

Performance

URTH vs. IWFQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) and iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

URTH is traded in USD, while IWFQ.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the IWFQ.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, URTH achieves a 8.07% return, which is significantly higher than IWFQ.L's 6.91% return. Over the past 10 years, URTH has outperformed IWFQ.L with an annualized return of 13.44%, while IWFQ.L has yielded a comparatively lower 12.56% annualized return.

URTH

1D
-1.45%
1M
-0.88%
YTD
8.07%
6M
7.24%
1Y
23.04%
3Y*
19.67%
5Y*
11.29%
10Y*
13.44%

IWFQ.L

1D
-1.34%
1M
-0.76%
YTD
6.91%
6M
6.52%
1Y
20.76%
3Y*
17.29%
5Y*
9.87%
10Y*
12.56%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

URTH vs. IWFQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
URTH
iShares MSCI World ETF		8.07%21.36%18.66%23.95%-17.97%22.27%15.78%28.15%-8.56%22.95%
IWFQ.L
iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS		6.91%15.51%16.94%25.44%-19.22%24.04%14.33%30.91%-7.87%23.17%

Correlation

The correlation between URTH and IWFQ.L is 0.71, 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

0.71

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

0.66

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

0.68

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.65

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2014

0.64

The correlation between URTH and IWFQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

URTH vs. IWFQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
URTH
IWFQ.L

Technology

32.8%
30.8%

Financial Services

15.8%
14.9%

Industrials

10.0%
10.2%

Communication Services

8.6%
9.0%

Healthcare

8.6%
9.0%

Consumer Cyclical

8.5%
9.5%

Consumer Defensive

4.7%
5.0%

Energy

3.7%
4.0%

Basic Materials

2.8%
3.3%

Utilities

2.6%
2.6%

Real Estate

1.2%
1.7%

Technology

URTH
32.8%
IWFQ.L
30.8%

Financial Services

URTH
15.8%
IWFQ.L
14.9%

Industrials

URTH
10.0%
IWFQ.L
10.2%

Communication Services

URTH
8.6%
IWFQ.L
9.0%

Healthcare

URTH
8.6%
IWFQ.L
9.0%

Consumer Cyclical

URTH
8.5%
IWFQ.L
9.5%

Consumer Defensive

URTH
4.7%
IWFQ.L
5.0%

Energy

URTH
3.7%
IWFQ.L
4.0%

Basic Materials

URTH
2.8%
IWFQ.L
3.3%

Utilities

URTH
2.6%
IWFQ.L
2.6%

Real Estate

URTH
1.2%
IWFQ.L
1.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares MSCI World ETF

iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS

Often compared with URTH:
URTH vs. VTURTH vs. IWDA.LURTH vs. SPYURTH vs. VOOURTH vs. XWD.TOURTH vs. BRK-BURTH vs. VXUS
Often compared with IWFQ.L:
IWFQ.L vs. IUQF.LIWFQ.L vs. SWDA.LIWFQ.L vs. GGRA.LIWFQ.L vs. GERD.DEIWFQ.L vs. MWMIXIWFQ.L vs. GOGB.LIWFQ.L vs. JQUA

Return for Risk

URTH vs. IWFQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
URTH
URTH Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
URTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
URTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
URTH Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
URTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
URTH Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L
IWFQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
IWFQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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. IWFQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) and iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.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.

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.

URTHIWFQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.83
1.85

-0.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.53
2.83

-0.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.33

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.55

2.32

+0.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.29

9.98

+1.31

URTH vs. IWFQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URTH Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is comparable to the IWFQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URTH and IWFQ.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...

Drawdowns

URTH vs. IWFQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URTH drawdown since its inception was -34.01%, smaller than the maximum IWFQ.L drawdown of -41.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URTH and IWFQ.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

URTHIWFQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.01%

-41.23%

+7.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.06%

-8.90%

-0.16%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.94%

-19.07%

+2.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.05%

-28.30%

+2.25%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.01%

-32.13%

-1.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.63%

-2.51%

-0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.36%

-14.23%

+9.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.05%

2.08%

-0.03%

Volatility

URTH vs. IWFQ.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) has a higher volatility of 4.71% compared to iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L) at 3.09%. This indicates that URTH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWFQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

URTHIWFQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.71%

3.09%

+1.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.26%

8.71%

+1.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.66%

11.18%

+1.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.28%

20.54%

-4.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.20%

18.19%

-0.99%

URTH vs. IWFQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

URTH has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than IWFQ.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

URTH vs. IWFQ.L - Dividend Comparison

URTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, while IWFQ.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWFQ.L
iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
URTH
iShares MSCI World ETF		1.42%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 IWFQ.L have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, URTH is cheaper at 0.24% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

URTH is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for IWFQ.L.

URTH tracks MSCI World Index (Net), while IWFQ.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for URTH and 0.30% for IWFQ.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for URTH and IWFQ.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