WHEA.L vs. ACWI.L
WHEA.L (State Street SPDR MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF) and ACWI.L (SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - WHEA.L is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the State Street SPDR MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF, while ACWI.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, WHEA.L returned 8.14%/yr vs 12.62%/yr for ACWI.L. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. WHEA.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ACWI.L.
Performance
WHEA.L vs. ACWI.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
WHEA.L is traded in USD, while ACWI.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the ACWI.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, WHEA.L achieves a 1.40% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI.L's 11.66% return. Over the past 10 years, WHEA.L has underperformed ACWI.L with an annualized return of 8.14%, while ACWI.L has yielded a comparatively higher 12.62% annualized return.
WHEA.L
- 1D
- 0.44%
- 1M
- 3.82%
- 6M
- -0.33%
- YTD
- 1.40%
- 1Y
- 17.80%
- 3Y*
- 7.00%
- 5Y*
- 4.42%
- 10Y*
- 8.14%
ACWI.L
- 1D
- 0.54%
- 1M
- -0.10%
- 6M
- 10.09%
- YTD
- 11.66%
- 1Y
- 24.38%
- 3Y*
- 19.32%
- 5Y*
- 11.36%
- 10Y*
- 12.62%
WHEA.L vs. ACWI.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WHEA.L State Street SPDR MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF | 1.40% | 15.24% | 1.05% | 3.54% | -5.55% | 20.41% | 12.93% | 23.18% | 1.48% | 20.27% |
ACWI.L SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF | 11.66% | 22.95% | 17.67% | 21.68% | -18.36% | 19.08% | 15.36% | 27.53% | -9.91% | 23.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between WHEA.L and ACWI.L is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2011 | 0.56 |
Over the past year, the correlation between WHEA.L and ACWI.L has dropped to 0.27 - well below their long-term average of 0.56, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
WHEA.L vs. ACWI.L — Risk / Return Rank
WHEA.L
ACWI.L
WHEA.L vs. ACWI.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street SPDR MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF (WHEA.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF (ACWI.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.
| WHEA.L | ACWI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.35 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.63 | 2.67 | -1.04 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.96 | 11.09 | -7.13 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
WHEA.L vs. ACWI.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum WHEA.L drawdown since its inception was -26.20%, smaller than the maximum ACWI.L drawdown of -34.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WHEA.L and ACWI.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| WHEA.L | ACWI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.20% | -34.13% | +7.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.35% | -9.09% | -1.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.16% | -19.12% | -0.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.16% | -26.90% | +7.74% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -26.20% | -34.13% | +7.93% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.30% | -0.63% | -2.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.76% | -5.36% | +0.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.27% | 2.19% | +2.08% |
Volatility
WHEA.L vs. ACWI.L - Volatility Comparison
State Street SPDR MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF (WHEA.L) has a higher volatility of 5.90% compared to SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF (ACWI.L) at 3.34%. This indicates that WHEA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| WHEA.L | ACWI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.90% | 3.34% | +2.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.52% | 9.97% | +1.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.11% | 12.36% | +2.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.27% | 20.57% | -6.30% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.73% | 19.09% | -4.36% |
WHEA.L vs. ACWI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
WHEA.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI.L's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
WHEA.L vs. ACWI.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither WHEA.L nor ACWI.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
WHEA.L and ACWI.L have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, WHEA.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
WHEA.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for ACWI.L.
WHEA.L is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while ACWI.L is Global Equities. WHEA.L tracks State Street SPDR MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF, while ACWI.L tracks MSCI ACWI Index. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for WHEA.L and 0.40% for ACWI.L.
Find the right allocation for WHEA.L and ACWI.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