XMU.TO vs. ACWV
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (XMU.TO) and iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV).
XMU.TO and ACWV are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. XMU.TO is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Index. It was launched on Jul 24, 2012. ACWV is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI AC World Minimum Volatility (USD). It was launched on Oct 18, 2011. Both XMU.TO and ACWV are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: XMU.TO or ACWV.
Key characteristics
| XMU.TO | ACWV | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 27.18% | 14.98% |
| 1Y Return | 28.56% | 21.90% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 10.30% | 4.41% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 9.86% | 6.09% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 12.96% | 7.49% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 3.68 | 3.03 |
| Sortino Ratio | 5.91 | 4.20 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.77 | 1.55 |
| Calmar Ratio | 9.33 | 2.65 |
| Martin Ratio | 28.24 | 19.46 |
| Ulcer Index | 1.05% | 1.16% |
| Daily Std Dev | 8.03% | 7.43% |
| Max Drawdown | -27.31% | -28.82% |
| Current Drawdown | 0.00% | -0.82% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMU.TO and ACWV is 0.81, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
XMU.TO vs. ACWV - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, XMU.TO achieves a 27.18% return, which is significantly higher than ACWV's 14.98% return. Over the past 10 years, XMU.TO has outperformed ACWV with an annualized return of 12.96%, while ACWV has yielded a comparatively lower 7.49% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
XMU.TO vs. ACWV - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMU.TO has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWV's 0.20% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
XMU.TO vs. ACWV - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (XMU.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.
Dividends
XMU.TO vs. ACWV - Dividend Comparison
XMU.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, less than ACWV's 2.16% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMU.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF | 1.13% | 1.41% | 1.17% | 1.06% | 1.68% | 1.44% | 1.48% | 1.59% | 1.83% | 1.43% | 4.96% | 1.30% |
ACWV iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF | 2.16% | 2.41% | 2.18% | 1.92% | 1.77% | 2.54% | 2.32% | 2.04% | 2.56% | 2.28% | 2.23% | 2.47% |
Drawdowns
XMU.TO vs. ACWV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMU.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.31%, smaller than the maximum ACWV drawdown of -28.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMU.TO and ACWV. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
XMU.TO vs. ACWV - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Min Vol USA Index ETF (XMU.TO) has a higher volatility of 3.23% compared to iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) at 2.15%. This indicates that XMU.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.