PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMAW.L (Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C) and IWVG.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both Global Equities funds - XMAW.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD while IWVG.L tracks the MSCI ACWI Value NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMAW.L returned 12.36%/yr vs 16.53%/yr for IWVG.L. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XMAW.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for IWVG.L.

Performance

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IWVG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XMAW.L is traded in GBp, while IWVG.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the IWVG.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMAW.L achieves a 11.58% return, which is significantly lower than IWVG.L's 34.35% return.

XMAW.L

1D
-0.13%
1M
5.65%
YTD
11.58%
6M
12.10%
1Y
30.53%
3Y*
18.30%
5Y*
12.36%
10Y*
13.42%

IWVG.L

1D
-0.61%
1M
13.03%
YTD
34.35%
6M
35.94%
1Y
63.14%
3Y*
25.28%
5Y*
16.53%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
XMAW.L
Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C		11.58%13.86%20.55%16.87%-10.40%20.70%12.24%21.60%-3.67%
IWVG.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		34.35%27.50%5.20%13.05%1.04%21.47%-6.83%14.46%-8.49%

Correlation

The correlation between XMAW.L and IWVG.L is 0.78, 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

0.78

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

0.76

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

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2018

0.84

The correlation between XMAW.L and IWVG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMAW.L
IWVG.L

Technology

31.4%
33.9%

Financial Services

17.2%
14.8%

Industrials

10.2%
11.3%

Communication Services

9.7%
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
7.9%

Healthcare

8.7%
8.8%

Basic Materials

3.4%
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

3.3%
4.5%

Energy

2.7%
3.8%

Real Estate

1.9%
1.8%

Utilities

1.9%
2.5%

Technology

XMAW.L
31.4%
IWVG.L
33.9%

Financial Services

XMAW.L
17.2%
IWVG.L
14.8%

Industrials

XMAW.L
10.2%
IWVG.L
11.3%

Communication Services

XMAW.L
9.7%
IWVG.L
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

XMAW.L
9.6%
IWVG.L
7.9%

Healthcare

XMAW.L
8.7%
IWVG.L
8.8%

Basic Materials

XMAW.L
3.4%
IWVG.L
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

XMAW.L
3.3%
IWVG.L
4.5%

Energy

XMAW.L
2.7%
IWVG.L
3.8%

Real Estate

XMAW.L
1.9%
IWVG.L
1.8%

Utilities

XMAW.L
1.9%
IWVG.L
2.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C

iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Dist)

Often compared with XMAW.L:
XMAW.L vs. GGRA.LXMAW.L vs. VWRP.LXMAW.L vs. ISAC.LXMAW.L vs. VEVE.LXMAW.L vs. VWRL.LXMAW.L vs. URTHXMAW.L vs. ACWL.L
Often compared with IWVG.L:
IWVG.L vs. IWQU.LIWVG.L vs. VTVIWVG.L vs. XDEV.LIWVG.L vs. URTHIWVG.L vs. VTIWVG.L vs. VWRA.LIWVG.L vs. IUVD.L

Return for Risk

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMAW.L
XMAW.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
XMAW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMAW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMAW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
XMAW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMAW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
IWVG.L
IWVG.L Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
IWVG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWVG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWVG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
IWVG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWVG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IWVG.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.

XMAW.LIWVG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.74
4.70

-1.96

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.77
6.30

-2.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

1.88

-0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.12

8.95

-4.82

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.61

33.30

-16.68

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMAW.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is lower than the IWVG.L Sharpe Ratio of 4.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAW.L and IWVG.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

XMAW.LIWVG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.74

4.70

-1.96

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

1.26

-0.34

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.92

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

0.73

+0.13

Drawdowns

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAW.L drawdown since its inception was -25.05%, smaller than the maximum IWVG.L drawdown of -28.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAW.L and IWVG.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMAW.LIWVG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.05%

-28.07%

+3.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.37%

-7.02%

-0.35%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.92%

-13.79%

-5.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.92%

-13.79%

-5.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.05%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.49%

-0.61%

+0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.83%

-4.31%

+0.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.83%

1.89%

-0.06%

Volatility

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.L) is 3.05%, while iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IWVG.L) has a volatility of 5.50%. This indicates that XMAW.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWVG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMAW.LIWVG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.05%

5.50%

-2.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.23%

10.95%

-2.72%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.09%

13.37%

-2.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.40%

13.07%

+0.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.60%

15.56%

-0.96%

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMAW.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than IWVG.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMAW.L vs. IWVG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMAW.L nor IWVG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
IWVG.L
iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		0.00%0.00%1.82%3.23%3.12%2.61%2.37%2.90%2.48%
XMAW.L
Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMAW.L and IWVG.L have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMAW.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMAW.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for IWVG.L.

XMAW.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while IWVG.L tracks MSCI ACWI Value NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMAW.L and 0.30% for IWVG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMAW.L and IWVG.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