XMAW.L vs. WRDA.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMAW.L (Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C) and WRDA.L (UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both Global Equities funds - XMAW.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD while WRDA.L tracks the MSCI World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XMAW.L returned 30.53% vs 27.42% for WRDA.L. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. XMAW.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for WRDA.L.

Performance

XMAW.L vs. WRDA.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 UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc (WRDA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMAW.L achieves a 11.58% return, which is significantly higher than WRDA.L's 10.16% 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%

WRDA.L

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 5.13%
• YTD: 10.16%
• 6M: 10.42%
• 1Y: 27.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
XMAW.L Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C	11.58%	13.86%	19.57%
WRDA.L UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc	10.16%	12.77%	20.02%

Correlation

The correlation between XMAW.L and WRDA.L is 0.98 - 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	0.98
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024	0.98

The correlation between XMAW.L and WRDA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XMAW.L vs. WRDA.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: 84
XMAW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
XMAW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
XMAW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 86
XMAW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
XMAW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 83

WRDA.L

WRDA.L Risk / Return Rank: 84
WRDA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
WRDA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
WRDA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 86
WRDA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
WRDA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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. WRDA.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 UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc (WRDA.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.L	WRDA.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.74	2.72	+0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.77	3.72	+0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.52	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.12	4.18	-0.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.61	16.68	-0.06
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. WRDA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMAW.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is comparable to the WRDA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAW.L and WRDA.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XMAW.L	WRDA.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.74	2.72	+0.02
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	1.51	-0.65

Drawdowns

XMAW.L vs. WRDA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAW.L drawdown since its inception was -25.05%, which is greater than WRDA.L's maximum drawdown of -18.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAW.L and WRDA.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMAW.L	WRDA.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.05%	-18.38%	-6.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.37%	-6.53%	-0.84%
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%	-0.12%	-0.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.83%	-2.27%	-1.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.83%	1.64%	+0.19%

Volatility

XMAW.L vs. WRDA.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.L) has a higher volatility of 3.05% compared to UBS Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD Acc (WRDA.L) at 2.49%. This indicates that XMAW.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WRDA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMAW.L	WRDA.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.05%	2.49%	+0.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.23%	7.16%	+1.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.09%	10.03%	+1.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.40%	12.34%	+1.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.60%	12.34%	+2.26%

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

XMAW.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than WRDA.L's 0.06% 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. WRDA.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMAW.L and WRDA.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, XMAW.L and WRDA.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.

Which ETF is better, XMAW.L or WRDA.L?

On fees, WRDA.L is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMAW.L or WRDA.L?

WRDA.L is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMAW.L.

What is the main difference between XMAW.L and WRDA.L?

XMAW.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while WRDA.L tracks MSCI World Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMAW.L and 0.06% for WRDA.L.