XNZS.L vs. WMVG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XNZS.L (Xtrackers World Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned UCITS ETF 1C) and WMVG.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc)) are both Global Equities funds - XNZS.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD while WMVG.L tracks the MSCI World Minimum Volatility. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XNZS.L returned 15.36%/yr vs 9.78%/yr for WMVG.L. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XNZS.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for WMVG.L.

Performance

XNZS.L vs. WMVG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers World Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned UCITS ETF 1C (XNZS.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XNZS.L achieves a 8.86% return, which is significantly higher than WMVG.L's 1.31% return.

XNZS.L

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 3.83%
• YTD: 8.86%
• 6M: 8.67%
• 1Y: 25.26%
• 3Y*: 15.36%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

WMVG.L

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 1.21%
• YTD: 1.31%
• 6M: 2.02%
• 1Y: 3.19%
• 3Y*: 9.78%
• 5Y*: 6.17%
• 10Y*: —

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

XNZS.L vs. WMVG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XNZS.L Xtrackers World Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned UCITS ETF 1C	8.86%	11.91%	17.28%	17.73%	-1.03%
WMVG.L iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc)	1.31%	9.08%	14.49%	7.33%	-1.93%

Correlation

The correlation between XNZS.L and WMVG.L is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.32
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2022	0.54

Over the past year, the correlation between XNZS.L and WMVG.L has dropped to 0.32 - well below their long-term average of 0.54, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

XNZS.L vs. WMVG.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

XNZS.L

XNZS.L Risk / Return Rank: 72
XNZS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
XNZS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
XNZS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 77
XNZS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
XNZS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 70

WMVG.L

WMVG.L Risk / Return Rank: 15
WMVG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
WMVG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
WMVG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 14
WMVG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
WMVG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 16

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.

XNZS.L vs. WMVG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers World Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned UCITS ETF 1C (XNZS.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.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.

	XNZS.L	WMVG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.37	0.39	+1.98
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.35	0.59	+2.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.07	+0.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.08	0.56	+2.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.87	1.40	+11.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XNZS.L vs. WMVG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XNZS.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is higher than the WMVG.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XNZS.L and WMVG.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

	XNZS.L	WMVG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.37	0.39	+1.98
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.62	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.95	0.55	+0.40

Drawdowns

XNZS.L vs. WMVG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XNZS.L drawdown since its inception was -18.52%, smaller than the maximum WMVG.L drawdown of -28.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XNZS.L and WMVG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XNZS.L	WMVG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.52%	-28.25%	+9.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.21%	-4.99%	-3.22%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.52%	-9.09%	-9.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-15.18%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.16%	-3.21%	+3.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.02%	-4.12%	+1.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.97%	2.01%	-0.04%

Volatility

XNZS.L vs. WMVG.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers World Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned UCITS ETF 1C (XNZS.L) has a higher volatility of 2.86% compared to iShares Edge MSCI World Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Acc) (WMVG.L) at 2.13%. This indicates that XNZS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WMVG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XNZS.L	WMVG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.86%	2.13%	+0.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.93%	5.03%	+2.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.69%	7.21%	+3.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.38%	9.95%	+3.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.38%	12.14%	+1.24%

XNZS.L vs. WMVG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XNZS.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than WMVG.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

XNZS.L vs. WMVG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XNZS.L nor WMVG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XNZS.L and WMVG.L in my portfolio?

XNZS.L and WMVG.L have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XNZS.L or WMVG.L?

On fees, XNZS.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XNZS.L or WMVG.L?

XNZS.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for WMVG.L.

What is the main difference between XNZS.L and WMVG.L?

XNZS.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while WMVG.L tracks MSCI World Minimum Volatility. They also come from different issuers: DWS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for XNZS.L and 0.35% for WMVG.L.