PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XMAW.L vs. PACW.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XMAW.L vs. PACW.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 Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with XMAW.L having a 11.58% return and PACW.L slightly higher at 11.92%.


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%

PACW.L

1D
-0.04%
1M
5.24%
YTD
11.92%
6M
12.31%
1Y
30.29%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


Correlation

The correlation between XMAW.L and PACW.L is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.99

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2025

0.99

The correlation between XMAW.L and PACW.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

XMAW.L vs. PACW.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

PACW.L
PACW.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
PACW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PACW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
PACW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
PACW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
PACW.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.

XMAW.L vs. PACW.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 Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.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.LPACW.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

1.55

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.12

4.27

-0.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.61

17.43

-0.82

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

The current XMAW.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is comparable to the PACW.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAW.L and PACW.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.LPACW.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.74

2.89

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

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

1.24

-0.38

Drawdowns

XMAW.L vs. PACW.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAW.L drawdown since its inception was -25.05%, which is greater than PACW.L's maximum drawdown of -17.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAW.L and PACW.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMAW.LPACW.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.05%

-17.68%

-7.37%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.37%

-7.06%

-0.31%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.92%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.92%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.49%

-0.46%

-0.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.83%

-3.02%

-0.81%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.83%

1.73%

+0.10%

Volatility

XMAW.L vs. PACW.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.L) and Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L) have volatilities of 3.05% and 2.93%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMAW.LPACW.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.05%

2.93%

+0.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.23%

7.75%

+0.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.09%

10.42%

+0.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.40%

13.91%

-0.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.60%

13.91%

+0.69%

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

XMAW.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than PACW.L's 0.07% 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

XMAW.L vs. PACW.L - Dividend Comparison

XMAW.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PACW.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%.


Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.99, XMAW.L and PACW.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, PACW.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

PACW.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMAW.L.

XMAW.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while PACW.L tracks Solactive GBS Global Markets Large & Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMAW.L and 0.07% for PACW.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMAW.L and PACW.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