URTH vs. NZAC
URTH (iShares MSCI World ETF) and NZAC (SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF) are both Global Equities funds - URTH tracks the MSCI World Index (Net) while NZAC tracks the MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, URTH returned 13.44%/yr vs 12.17%/yr for NZAC. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. URTH charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for NZAC.
Performance
URTH vs. NZAC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, URTH achieves a 8.07% return, which is significantly higher than NZAC's 6.02% return. Over the past 10 years, URTH has outperformed NZAC with an annualized return of 13.44%, while NZAC has yielded a comparatively lower 12.17% 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%
NZAC
- 1D
- -1.70%
- 1M
- -1.26%
- YTD
- 6.02%
- 6M
- 5.37%
- 1Y
- 20.66%
- 3Y*
- 17.81%
- 5Y*
- 9.25%
- 10Y*
- 12.17%
URTH vs. NZAC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF | 6.02% | 20.55% | 16.67% | 23.22% | -19.77% | 18.35% | 17.21% | 28.24% | -9.80% | 22.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between URTH and NZAC is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 26, 2014 | 0.87 |
The correlation between URTH and NZAC shifts across timeframes, from 0.87 (all time) to 0.98 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. NZAC — Risk / Return Rank
URTH
NZAC
URTH vs. NZAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). 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 | NZAC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.40 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.27 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.55 | 2.05 | +0.50 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.29 | 8.63 | +2.66 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
URTH vs. NZAC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum URTH drawdown since its inception was -34.01%, roughly equal to the maximum NZAC drawdown of -33.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URTH and NZAC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| URTH | NZAC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.01% | -33.72% | -0.29% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.06% | -10.10% | +1.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.94% | -16.19% | -0.75% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.05% | -28.31% | +2.26% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.01% | -33.72% | -0.29% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.63% | -3.38% | +0.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.36% | -5.31% | +0.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.05% | 2.40% | -0.35% |
Volatility
URTH vs. NZAC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) is 4.71%, while SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC) has a volatility of 5.41%. This indicates that URTH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NZAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| URTH | NZAC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.71% | 5.41% | -0.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.26% | 11.34% | -1.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.66% | 13.73% | -1.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.28% | 16.94% | -0.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.20% | 17.13% | +0.07% |
URTH vs. NZAC - Expense Ratio Comparison
URTH has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is higher than NZAC's 0.12% 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. NZAC - Dividend Comparison
URTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, less than NZAC's 2.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF | 2.09% | 1.90% | 1.88% | 1.65% | 1.81% | 1.62% | 1.59% | 2.17% | 2.53% | 2.20% | 2.00% | 2.40% |
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
With a correlation of 0.98, URTH and NZAC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
NZAC has higher volatility (5.41%) compared to URTH (4.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URTH dropped -34.01% vs NZAC's -33.72%.
On 10-year performance, URTH leads with 13.44% vs 12.17% for NZAC. On fees, NZAC is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, URTH has been the lower-risk option at 4.71%. 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 13.44% return vs 12.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NZAC is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for URTH.
NZAC has the higher dividend yield at 2.09%, compared with 1.42% for URTH.
URTH tracks MSCI World Index (Net), while NZAC tracks MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for URTH and 0.12% for NZAC.
URTH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.52), 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 NZAC
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