ACWI vs AGD
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF vs Abrdn Global Dynamic Dividend Fund
Which is better, ACWI or AGD?
Each has led over a different period.
ACWI has a lower expense ratio. ACWI led over 1Y, 5Y and the full window, AGD over 3Y. ACWI is less concentrated, with 25.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 27.7%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACWI | AGD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.32%Best | 1.35% |
| AUM | $33.2B | $313M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.41% | 12.36% |
| Holdings | 2,280 | 89 |
| YTD Return | +12.14%Best | +4.34% |
| 1Y Return | +17.07%Best | +12.13% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.96% | +21.49%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.83%Best | +8.73% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.5%Best | 24.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.3%Best | -85.1% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,722Best | $15,197 |
| Top 10 Weight | 25.3%Best | 27.7% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Aberdeen |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Mar 26, 2008 | Jul 26, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 28, 2008 to Oct 14, 2026 (18.5 years).
ACWI vs AGD growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 18.5 years both funds cover.
ACWI vs AGD Performance
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Abrdn Global Dynamic Dividend Fund (AGD) is an ETF from Aberdeen. Over the past year ACWI returned +17.07% while AGD returned +12.13%. Year to date, ACWI is up 12.14% versus a gain of 4.34% for AGD.
Over three years, ACWI compounded at +20.96% per year against +21.49% for AGD; over five years the annualized figures are +10.83% and +8.73% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, ACWI has the edge at +6.92% annualized vs -3.53%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AGD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 24.3% compared with 16.5% for ACWI. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -56.3% for ACWI and -85.1% for AGD. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACWI charges 0.32% per year while AGD charges 1.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $32 vs $135 annually, a gap of $103 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACWI currently yields 1.41% against 12.36% for AGD.
Holdings Overlap
26.5% of ACWI's money is in holdings AGD also owns. 79.5% of AGD's money is in holdings ACWI also owns.
Most of AGD is already inside ACWI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
The two holdings books were reported 62 days apart, ACWI as of Oct 1, 2026 and AGD as of Jul 31, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
64 positions in common, counted across the 2,139 positions we hold weights for in ACWI and 87 in AGD, against full books of 2,280 and 89.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 3 positions for AGD that do not appear in our book for ACWI (4.7% of the fund), and 469 for ACWI that do not appear in AGD (43.2%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in ACWI | Weight in AGD | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.71% | 3.14% | 1.57% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 5.15% | 2.49% | 2.66% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 3.51% | 3.04% | 0.47% |
| 2330:TWTsmc | 1.88% | 3.72% | 1.84% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 1.52% | 3.43% | 1.91% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.51% | 3.35% | 1.84% |
| 005935:KRSamsung Electronics Pref 0.9 | 0.12% | 3.48% | 3.36% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 0.86% | 1.58% | 0.72% |
| ASML:ASASML HOLDING NV | 0.68% | 1.60% | 0.92% |
| 8306:JPMitsubishi Ufj Financial Group, Inc. | 0.24% | 1.69% | 1.45% |
79.5% of AGD is already inside ACWI.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACWI or AGD?
ACWI has an expense ratio of 0.32% while AGD charges 1.35%. ACWI is the cheaper option, by $103 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ACWI or AGD?
Over the past year ACWI returned +17.07% vs +12.13% for AGD, so ACWI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), ACWI annualized +6.92% vs -3.53% for AGD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ACWI or AGD?
AGD has been the more volatile fund at 24.3% annualized versus 16.5% for ACWI. Worst drawdown: ACWI -56.3% vs AGD -85.1%.
Should I hold both ACWI and AGD?
ACWI and AGD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between ACWI and AGD?
79.5% of AGD's money is in holdings ACWI also owns. 79.5% of AGD's is in holdings ACWI also owns. They hold 64 positions in common, counted across the 2,139 positions we hold weights for in ACWI and 87 in AGD.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACWI or AGD?
ACWI yields 1.41% while AGD yields 12.36%, so AGD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is AGD better than ACWI?
ACWI has a lower expense ratio. ACWI led over 1Y, 5Y and the full window, AGD over 3Y. ACWI is less concentrated, with 25.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 27.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.