PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XDGH.TO vs. ACWV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV

Last updated Jul 1, 2026
See Documentation

XDGH.TO (iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and ACWV (iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Global Equities funds from iShares - XDGH.TO tracks the Morningstar Gbl GR CAD while ACWV tracks the MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XDGH.TO returned 8.97%/yr vs 8.30%/yr for ACWV. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XDGH.TO charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACWV.

Performance

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XDGH.TO) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XDGH.TO is traded in CAD, while ACWV is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the ACWV values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XDGH.TO achieves a 9.14% return, which is significantly higher than ACWV's 5.97% return.

XDGH.TO

1D
-0.22%
1M
1.13%
YTD
9.14%
6M
9.25%
1Y
19.25%
3Y*
13.03%
5Y*
8.97%
10Y*
—

ACWV

1D
-0.06%
1M
2.48%
YTD
5.97%
6M
5.53%
1Y
7.39%
3Y*
12.09%
5Y*
8.30%
10Y*
7.93%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XDGH.TO
iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		9.14%14.60%10.49%9.52%-1.31%15.69%-4.23%22.41%-8.05%8.13%
ACWV
iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF		5.97%5.97%20.82%5.66%-4.68%13.91%0.60%16.05%6.87%0.89%

Correlation

The correlation between XDGH.TO and ACWV is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.46

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

0.47

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

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 19, 2017

0.38

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XDGH.TO
ACWV

Healthcare

16.9%
13.0%

Consumer Defensive

14.9%
9.8%

Industrials

13.4%
8.1%

Financial Services

13.0%
13.2%

Technology

10.5%
25.8%

Energy

10.1%
3.7%

Consumer Cyclical

9.4%
5.1%

Utilities

6.0%
7.3%

Communication Services

3.3%
11.9%

Basic Materials

2.3%
1.5%

Real Estate

0.2%
0.6%

Healthcare

XDGH.TO
16.9%
ACWV
13.0%

Consumer Defensive

XDGH.TO
14.9%
ACWV
9.8%

Industrials

XDGH.TO
13.4%
ACWV
8.1%

Financial Services

XDGH.TO
13.0%
ACWV
13.2%

Technology

XDGH.TO
10.5%
ACWV
25.8%

Energy

XDGH.TO
10.1%
ACWV
3.7%

Consumer Cyclical

XDGH.TO
9.4%
ACWV
5.1%

Utilities

XDGH.TO
6.0%
ACWV
7.3%

Communication Services

XDGH.TO
3.3%
ACWV
11.9%

Basic Materials

XDGH.TO
2.3%
ACWV
1.5%

Real Estate

XDGH.TO
0.2%
ACWV
0.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF

Often compared with XDGH.TO:
XDGH.TO vs. XDG.TOXDGH.TO vs. XHD.TOXDGH.TO vs. XEQT.TOXDGH.TO vs. XDUH.TOXDGH.TO vs. VFV.TOXDGH.TO vs. VIDY.TOXDGH.TO vs. VDY.TO
Often compared with ACWV:
ACWV vs. USMVACWV vs. VTACWV vs. MVOL.LACWV vs. EFAVACWV vs. SPLVACWV vs. VOOACWV vs. XMW.TO

Return for Risk

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XDGH.TO
XDGH.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
XDGH.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDGH.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank
ACWV
ACWV Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
ACWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWV Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWV Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
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.

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XDGH.TO) 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.

XDGH.TOACWVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.03
0.81

+1.21

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.06
1.19

+1.87

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.15

+0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.03

1.41

+1.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.04

3.46

+5.58

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDGH.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is higher than the ACWV Sharpe Ratio of 0.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDGH.TO and ACWV, 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...

Drawdowns

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDGH.TO drawdown since its inception was -34.91%, which is greater than ACWV's maximum drawdown of -22.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDGH.TO and ACWV.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XDGH.TOACWVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.91%

-22.43%

-12.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.38%

-5.27%

-1.11%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.96%

-8.50%

-3.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.06%

-14.73%

-1.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-22.43%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.44%

-0.06%

-0.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.63%

-2.66%

-1.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.13%

2.14%

-0.01%

Volatility

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XDGH.TO) is 2.05%, while iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) has a volatility of 3.36%. This indicates that XDGH.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XDGH.TOACWVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.05%

3.36%

-1.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.82%

7.08%

-0.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.55%

9.21%

+0.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.41%

12.03%

+2.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.39%

13.93%

+9.46%

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDGH.TO has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWV's 0.20% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XDGH.TO vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison

XDGH.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.78%, more than ACWV's 1.97% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWV
iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF		1.97%2.09%2.33%2.41%2.18%1.92%1.77%2.54%2.32%2.04%2.56%2.28%
XDGH.TO
iShares Core MSCI Global Quality Dividend Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		2.78%2.81%3.04%3.41%3.20%3.13%3.35%2.92%3.40%1.27%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

XDGH.TO and ACWV have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ACWV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ACWV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.22% for XDGH.TO.

XDGH.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while ACWV tracks MSCI ACWI Minimum Volatility Index. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for XDGH.TO and 0.20% for ACWV.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XDGH.TO 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