PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
WATL.L vs. ACWL.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

WATL.L vs. ACWL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Lyxor MSCI Water ESG Filtered (DR) UCITS ETF Dist (WATL.L) and Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WATL.L achieves a -0.73% return, which is significantly lower than ACWL.L's 12.22% return. Over the past 10 years, WATL.L has underperformed ACWL.L with an annualized return of 9.23%, while ACWL.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.71% annualized return.


WATL.L

1D
0.11%
1M
-1.73%
YTD
-0.73%
6M
-1.98%
1Y
0.41%
3Y*
7.21%
5Y*
5.88%
10Y*
9.23%

ACWL.L

1D
-0.20%
1M
5.47%
YTD
12.22%
6M
12.15%
1Y
29.76%
3Y*
17.87%
5Y*
12.34%
10Y*
13.71%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WATL.L vs. ACWL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
WATL.L
Lyxor MSCI Water ESG Filtered (DR) UCITS ETF Dist
-0.73%6.48%7.33%16.26%-11.97%25.45%13.28%32.02%-12.80%14.47%
ACWL.L
Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF
12.22%13.63%21.43%13.09%-8.59%20.41%9.74%18.01%2.02%11.14%

Correlation

The correlation between WATL.L and ACWL.L is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.42

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

0.37

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

0.31

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

0.23

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2015

0.21

Over the past year, WATL.L and ACWL.L have become more correlated (0.42) than their long-term average of 0.21, meaning their price movements have been converging.

WATL.L vs. ACWL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
WATL.L
ACWL.L

Industrials

76.6%
10.9%

Utilities

21.6%
2.6%

Technology

1.2%
29.3%

Basic Materials

0.6%
3.7%

Communication Services

0.0%
9.0%

Consumer Cyclical

0.0%
9.3%

Financial Services

0.0%
16.2%

Consumer Defensive

0.0%
5.0%

Energy

0.0%
4.2%

Healthcare

0.0%
8.1%

Real Estate

-

1.8%

Industrials

WATL.L
76.6%
ACWL.L
10.9%

Utilities

WATL.L
21.6%
ACWL.L
2.6%

Technology

WATL.L
1.2%
ACWL.L
29.3%

Basic Materials

WATL.L
0.6%
ACWL.L
3.7%

Communication Services

WATL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
9.0%

Consumer Cyclical

WATL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
9.3%

Financial Services

WATL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
16.2%

Consumer Defensive

WATL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
5.0%

Energy

WATL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
4.2%

Healthcare

WATL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
8.1%

Real Estate

WATL.L

-

ACWL.L
1.8%

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

WATL.L vs. ACWL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

WATL.L
WATL.L Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
WATL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WATL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
WATL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
WATL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
WATL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWL.L
ACWL.L Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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.

WATL.L vs. ACWL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor MSCI Water ESG Filtered (DR) UCITS ETF Dist (WATL.L) and Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.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.


WATL.LACWL.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.97

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.96

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.02

1.58

-0.56

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.04

4.20

-4.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.09

17.39

-17.30

WATL.L vs. ACWL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WATL.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.04, which is lower than the ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WATL.L and ACWL.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


WATL.LACWL.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.04

3.01

-2.97

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.43

1.89

-1.45

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.67

2.60

-1.93

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.93

2.35

-1.42

Drawdowns

WATL.L vs. ACWL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WATL.L drawdown since its inception was -28.96%, which is greater than ACWL.L's maximum drawdown of -18.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WATL.L and ACWL.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


WATL.LACWL.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.96%

-18.15%

-10.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.38%

-7.06%

-4.32%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.45%

-18.15%

+4.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.48%

-18.15%

-5.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.96%

-18.15%

-10.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.15%

-0.22%

-9.93%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.68%

-2.43%

-2.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.47%

1.71%

+2.76%

Volatility

WATL.L vs. ACWL.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor MSCI Water ESG Filtered (DR) UCITS ETF Dist (WATL.L) has a higher volatility of 3.51% compared to Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L) at 2.63%. This indicates that WATL.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


WATL.LACWL.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.51%

2.63%

+0.88%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.95%

6.99%

+1.96%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.22%

9.84%

+1.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.12%

16.52%

-2.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.75%

23.32%

-7.57%

WATL.L vs. ACWL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

WATL.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWL.L's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

WATL.L vs. ACWL.L - Dividend Comparison

WATL.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%, while ACWL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWL.L
Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
WATL.L
Lyxor MSCI Water ESG Filtered (DR) UCITS ETF Dist
1.09%1.08%0.77%0.84%0.42%0.63%1.22%1.59%2.06%1.60%2.21%2.43%

Frequently Asked Questions


WATL.L and ACWL.L have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ACWL.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ACWL.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for WATL.L.

WATL.L is categorized as Water Equities, while ACWL.L is Global Equities. WATL.L tracks S&P Global Water TR, while ACWL.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for WATL.L and 0.45% for ACWL.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for WATL.L and ACWL.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