Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

ACWX vs URTH: how they differ

ACWX and URTH hold 27% of their weight in the same names, and ACWX returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI ACWI ex U.S. ETF and iShares MSCI World ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, ACWX and URTH hold 27% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions ACWX and URTH both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingACWXURTH
ASML Holding N.V.1.54%0.69%
HSBC HOLDINGS PLC0.86%0.35%
ASTRAZENECA PLC0.81%0.32%
Novartis AG0.77%0.31%
ROYAL BANK OF CANADA0.69%0.29%
Nestle S.A.0.72%0.29%
SHELL PLC0.71%0.26%
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft0.62%0.26%
BHP GROUP LIMITED0.55%0.25%
Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.0.57%0.23%
COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA0.58%0.22%
THE TORONTO-DOMINION BANK0.50%0.21%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in ACWXOnly in URTH
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Compa 4.69%NVIDIA CORPORATION 5.64%
SK hynix Inc. 1.33%APPLE INC. 5.04%
Tencent Holdings Limited 1.07%MICROSOFT CORPORATION 3.50%
Alibaba Group Holding Limited 0.79%AMAZON.COM, INC. 2.86%
DELTA ELECTRONICS, INC. 0.37%ALPHABET INC. 2.43%
MediaTek Inc. 0.35%BROADCOM INC. 2.21%
HON HAI PRECISION INDUSTRY CO., LTD. 0.25%ALPHABET INC. 2.01%
RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED 0.25%META PLATFORMS, INC. 1.51%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

ACWX and URTH on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
ACWX
iShares MSCI ACWI ex U.S. ETF
URTH
iShares MSCI World ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isMSCI ACWI ex U.S.MSCI World
Total return, 1 year+23.0%+17.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.5 pts−0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.32%0.24%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%70.3%
Holdings17591322

ACWX in plain words

ACWX is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI ACWI ex U.S.. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +23.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.32% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1759 positions, with the top ten at 14.6%.

URTH in plain words

URTH is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI World. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.24% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 70% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1322 positions, with the top ten at 27.8%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ACWX or URTH?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ACWX returned +23.0% and URTH returned +17.4%, so ACWX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, ACWX or URTH?
ACWX charges 0.32% a year and URTH charges 0.24%, so URTH is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do ACWX and URTH overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of ACWX and 70% of URTH by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 27% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

ACWX against URTH, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, ACWX against URTH, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ACWX-URTH Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources