VT vs. ACWV
VT (Vanguard Total World Stock ETF) and ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds - VT tracks the FTSE Global All Cap Index while ACWV tracks the MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, VT returned 12.58%/yr vs 7.02%/yr for ACWV. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. VT charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.
Performance
VT vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, VT achieves a 12.41% return, which is significantly higher than ACWV's 3.98% return. Over the past 10 years, VT has outperformed ACWV with an annualized return of 12.58%, while ACWV has yielded a comparatively lower 7.02% annualized return.
VT
- 1D
- 0.40%
- 1M
- 4.13%
- 6M
- 9.67%
- YTD
- 12.41%
- 1Y
- 23.49%
- 3Y*
- 19.87%
- 5Y*
- 10.78%
- 10Y*
- 12.58%
ACWV
- 1D
- 0.34%
- 1M
- 2.06%
- 6M
- 3.35%
- YTD
- 3.98%
- 1Y
- 5.83%
- 3Y*
- 10.38%
- 5Y*
- 5.57%
- 10Y*
- 7.02%
VT vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VT Vanguard Total World Stock ETF | 12.41% | 22.43% | 16.49% | 22.02% | -18.00% | 18.27% | 16.59% | 26.81% | -9.76% | 24.50% |
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF | 3.98% | 11.04% | 11.38% | 8.23% | -10.36% | 13.97% | 3.04% | 21.04% | -1.42% | 18.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between VT and ACWV is 0.56, 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 | 0.56 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 20, 2011 | 0.81 |
Over the past year, the correlation between VT and ACWV has dropped to 0.56 - well below their long-term average of 0.81, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
VT vs. ACWV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
VT
ACWV
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
VT
ACWV
Financial Services
VT
ACWV
Industrials
VT
ACWV
Consumer Cyclical
VT
ACWV
Communication Services
VT
ACWV
Healthcare
VT
ACWV
Consumer Defensive
VT
ACWV
Basic Materials
VT
ACWV
Energy
VT
ACWV
Utilities
VT
ACWV
Real Estate
VT
ACWV
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
VT vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank
VT
ACWV
VT vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT) 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.
| VT | ACWV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.34 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.13 | +0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.44 | 0.92 | +1.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.41 | 2.63 | +7.78 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
VT vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum VT drawdown since its inception was -50.27%, which is greater than ACWV's maximum drawdown of -28.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VT and ACWV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| VT | ACWV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -50.27% | -28.82% | -21.45% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.67% | -6.37% | -3.30% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.51% | -7.56% | -8.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.38% | -18.14% | -8.24% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.24% | -28.82% | -5.42% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.72% | -1.38% | +0.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.99% | -3.11% | -3.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.26% | 2.22% | +0.04% |
Volatility
VT vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison
Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT) has a higher volatility of 4.90% compared to iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) at 3.16%. This indicates that VT'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
| VT | ACWV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.90% | 3.16% | +1.74% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.41% | 6.25% | +5.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.61% | 8.08% | +5.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.19% | 10.27% | +5.92% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.15% | 12.29% | +4.86% |
VT vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison
VT has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWV's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
VT vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison
VT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.58%, less than ACWV's 1.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
VT Vanguard Total World Stock ETF | 1.58% | 1.82% | 1.95% | 2.08% | 2.20% | 1.82% | 1.66% | 2.32% | 2.53% | 2.11% | 2.39% | 2.45% |
Frequently Asked Questions
VT and ACWV have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
VT has higher volatility (4.90%) compared to ACWV (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VT dropped -50.27% vs ACWV's -28.82%.
On 10-year performance, VT leads with 12.58% vs 7.02% for ACWV. On fees, VT is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, ACWV has been the lower-risk option at 3.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, VT has performed better with a 12.58% return vs 7.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VT is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for ACWV.
ACWV has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 1.58% for VT.
VT tracks FTSE Global All Cap Index, while ACWV tracks MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for VT and 0.20% for ACWV.
VT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 0.72), 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 VT 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