PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.L) and VanEck Morningstar Global Wide Moat UCITS ETF (GOGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WMVG.L achieves a 1.26% return, which is significantly higher than GOGB.L's -1.30% return.


WMVG.L

1D
-0.37%
1M
1.52%
YTD
1.26%
6M
2.42%
1Y
2.81%
3Y*
9.88%
5Y*
6.05%
10Y*

GOGB.L

1D
-0.41%
1M
-0.90%
YTD
-1.30%
6M
-1.15%
1Y
8.81%
3Y*
10.12%
5Y*
7.27%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
WMVG.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc)
1.26%9.07%14.47%7.36%-8.31%16.96%6.93%
GOGB.L
VanEck Morningstar Global Wide Moat UCITS ETF
-1.30%16.96%11.22%4.82%-0.45%15.91%8.43%

Correlation

The correlation between WMVG.L and GOGB.L is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.38

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

0.52

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

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2020

0.62

Over the past year, the correlation between WMVG.L and GOGB.L has dropped to 0.38 - well below their long-term average of 0.62, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
WMVG.L
GOGB.L

Technology

20.1%
16.5%

Financial Services

14.0%
7.4%

Healthcare

13.8%
15.1%

Communication Services

12.1%
6.4%

Consumer Defensive

10.9%
17.2%

Industrials

9.2%
26.4%

Utilities

8.0%

-

Consumer Cyclical

5.6%
9.9%

Energy

4.5%

-

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.1%

Real Estate

0.7%

-

Technology

WMVG.L
20.1%
GOGB.L
16.5%

Financial Services

WMVG.L
14.0%
GOGB.L
7.4%

Healthcare

WMVG.L
13.8%
GOGB.L
15.1%

Communication Services

WMVG.L
12.1%
GOGB.L
6.4%

Consumer Defensive

WMVG.L
10.9%
GOGB.L
17.2%

Industrials

WMVG.L
9.2%
GOGB.L
26.4%

Utilities

WMVG.L
8.0%
GOGB.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

WMVG.L
5.6%
GOGB.L
9.9%

Energy

WMVG.L
4.5%
GOGB.L

-

Basic Materials

WMVG.L
1.1%
GOGB.L
1.1%

Real Estate

WMVG.L
0.7%
GOGB.L

-

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

WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

WMVG.L
WMVG.L Risk / Return Rank: 1616
Overall Rank
WMVG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WMVG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
WMVG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
WMVG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
WMVG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank

GOGB.L
GOGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
GOGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GOGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
GOGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
GOGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
GOGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
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.

WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.L) and VanEck Morningstar Global Wide Moat UCITS ETF (GOGB.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.


WMVG.LGOGB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.14

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.57

0.81

-0.24

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.39

2.57

-1.18

WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WMVG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.38, which is lower than the GOGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WMVG.L and GOGB.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


WMVG.LGOGB.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.38

0.77

-0.39

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.61

0.58

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

0.71

-0.16

Drawdowns

WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WMVG.L drawdown since its inception was -28.25%, which is greater than GOGB.L's maximum drawdown of -13.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WMVG.L and GOGB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


WMVG.LGOGB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.25%

-13.83%

-14.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.93%

-10.88%

+5.95%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.07%

-13.83%

+4.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.18%

-13.83%

-1.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.25%

-6.22%

+2.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.11%

-3.25%

-0.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.02%

3.42%

-1.40%

Volatility

WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.L) is 2.22%, while VanEck Morningstar Global Wide Moat UCITS ETF (GOGB.L) has a volatility of 2.62%. This indicates that WMVG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GOGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


WMVG.LGOGB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.22%

2.62%

-0.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.01%

9.18%

-4.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.31%

11.35%

-4.04%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.99%

12.65%

-2.66%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.15%

12.92%

-0.77%

WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

WMVG.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GOGB.L's 0.52% expense ratio.


Dividends

WMVG.L vs. GOGB.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither WMVG.L nor GOGB.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


WMVG.L and GOGB.L have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, WMVG.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

WMVG.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for GOGB.L.

WMVG.L tracks MSCI World Minimum Volatility, while GOGB.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for WMVG.L and 0.52% for GOGB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for WMVG.L and GOGB.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