PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
UTIP.L vs. ACWX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

UTIP.L vs. ACWX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF (UTIP.L) and iShares MSCI ACWI ex U.S. ETF (ACWX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

UTIP.L is traded in GBP, while ACWX is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the ACWX values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UTIP.L achieves a -0.61% return, which is significantly lower than ACWX's 15.02% return. Over the past 10 years, UTIP.L has outperformed ACWX with an annualized return of 41.75%, while ACWX has yielded a comparatively lower 10.33% annualized return.


UTIP.L

1D
0.00%
1M
0.96%
YTD
-0.61%
6M
-1.42%
1Y
1.23%
3Y*
-2.70%
5Y*
-2.60%
10Y*
41.75%

ACWX

1D
0.22%
1M
4.93%
YTD
15.02%
6M
16.10%
1Y
32.75%
3Y*
16.62%
5Y*
9.58%
10Y*
10.33%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UTIP.L vs. ACWX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UTIP.L
SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF
-0.61%-3.83%-0.45%-6.33%-8.86%4.03%279.51%55.61%265.06%56.18%
ACWX
iShares MSCI ACWI ex U.S. ETF
15.02%23.15%7.01%9.85%-6.09%8.69%7.05%16.45%-8.89%16.20%

Correlation

The correlation between UTIP.L and ACWX is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.07

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

0.02

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

-0.02

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

0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 7, 2015

0.11

The correlation between UTIP.L and ACWX shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (1 year) to 0.12 (10 years), 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

UTIP.L vs. ACWX — Risk / Return Rank

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

UTIP.L
UTIP.L Risk / Return Rank: 1111
Overall Rank
UTIP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UTIP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
UTIP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
UTIP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
UTIP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1111
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWX
ACWX Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
ACWX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWX Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWX Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
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.

UTIP.L vs. ACWX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF (UTIP.L) and iShares MSCI ACWI ex U.S. ETF (ACWX). 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.


UTIP.LACWXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.36

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.04

1.49

-0.45

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.19

3.25

-3.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.38

13.05

-12.67

UTIP.L vs. ACWX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UTIP.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.17, which is lower than the ACWX Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UTIP.L and ACWX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


UTIP.LACWXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.17

2.53

-2.36

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.28

0.73

-1.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.35

0.66

-0.31

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.35

0.38

-0.03

Drawdowns

UTIP.L vs. ACWX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UTIP.L drawdown since its inception was -23.72%, smaller than the maximum ACWX drawdown of -44.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UTIP.L and ACWX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


UTIP.LACWXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.72%

-44.20%

+20.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.54%

-10.14%

+3.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.48%

-13.25%

+2.77%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.38%

-14.93%

-7.45%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-23.72%

-28.44%

+4.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-21.46%

-0.48%

-20.98%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.04%

-6.91%

-2.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.27%

2.52%

+0.75%

Volatility

UTIP.L vs. ACWX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF (UTIP.L) is 1.76%, while iShares MSCI ACWI ex U.S. ETF (ACWX) has a volatility of 4.62%. This indicates that UTIP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


UTIP.LACWXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.76%

4.62%

-2.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.86%

11.13%

-6.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.14%

13.02%

-5.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.35%

13.19%

-3.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

118.48%

15.71%

+102.77%

UTIP.L vs. ACWX - Expense Ratio Comparison

UTIP.L has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWX's 0.32% expense ratio.


Dividends

UTIP.L vs. ACWX - Dividend Comparison

UTIP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ACWX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.46%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWX
iShares MSCI ACWI ex U.S. ETF
2.46%2.82%2.97%2.96%2.68%2.74%1.88%3.22%2.60%2.40%2.77%2.51%
UTIP.L
SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%69.04%31.90%67.27%43.97%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


UTIP.L and ACWX have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, UTIP.L is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

UTIP.L is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWX.

UTIP.L is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while ACWX is Foreign Large Cap Equities. UTIP.L tracks Bloomberg Gbl Infl Linked US TIPS TR USD, while ACWX tracks MSCI All Country World ex-U.S. Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for UTIP.L and 0.32% for ACWX.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UTIP.L and ACWX

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