ACWV ranks 2nd and GRIN 14th of 15 funds in the International Factor Index Category.
ACWV vs GRIN
ACWV −0.36pt a year
0.20%0.56%
ACWV 2.7×the volume
93.5K34.4K
ACWV vs GRIN Performance
+11.7%+12.7%
- ACWV 0.20%, better
- GRIN 0.56%
- ACWV $3.44B
- GRIN $346M
- ACWV +11.7%
- GRIN +12.7%, better
- ACWV 1.83%, better
- GRIN 0.67%
- ACWV 407
- GRIN 103
- ACWV 93.5K sh, better
- GRIN 34.4K sh
- ACWV $129.38
- GRIN $31.16
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | ACWV | GRIN |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A89Higher | D25 |
| Mission | D25 | A71Higher |
| Risk | A77Higher | F16 |
| Tradability | A83Higher | D26 |
| Holdings | A76Higher | C40 |
| Durability | A76Higher | F20 |
Rank among International Factor Index funds
Same Category. ACWV and GRIN are both graded against the same 15 International Factor Index funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
ACWVB
GRIND
In short
ACWV Global min vol in one ticker: an optimizer sifts the MSCI ACWI universe, developed and emerging, for the lowest-risk mix of roughly 400 stocks. Same playbook since 2011, at 0.20% a year.
GRIN Free-cash-flow funds abroad usually hunt cheap cash cows. GRIN runs the math the other way: non-US developed large caps ranked on cash generated per dollar of invested capital, then screened for sales and profit growth.
Stated mandate
ACWV The fund seeks to track an index of developed and emerging market equities that collectively exhibit lower volatility than the broader developed and emerging equity markets.
GRIN The fund is designed to provide exposure to equity securities of growth companies in non-U.S. developed markets, using free-cash-flow-oriented profitability measures in the index methodology.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
ACWV vs GRIN Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
ACWV vs GRIN Cost
Overpaying GRIN vs ACWV
$6,933
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
ACWV 0.20%
$4,155
GRIN 0.56%
$11,088
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | ACWV | GRIN | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $365 | $1,006 | $641 |
| 20 | $1,421 | $3,855 | $2,434 |
| 30 | $4,155 | $11,088 | $6,933 |
- 0.20%ACWV, cheaper
- 0.56%GRIN
- Middle half of International Factor Index funds
- Median 0.34%
ACWV 2nd cheapest of 15 funds
GRIN 12th cheapest of 15 funds
ACWV vs GRIN Dividends
- ACWV 1.83%, better
- GRIN 0.67%
- ACWV $2.36
- GRIN $0.21
- ACWV $1.07
- GRIN $0.05
- ACWV Jun 15, 2026
- GRIN Oct 8, 2026
- ACWV Jun 18, 2026
- GRIN Oct 9, 2026
- ACWV Twice a year
- GRIN Monthly
Distribution history
ACWV vs GRIN Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- ACWV 8.7%GRIN 19.5%
- Return per unit of risk
- ACWV 1.03GRIN 0.63
- Worst fall
- ACWV −18.1%GRIN −14.3%
- Market sensitivity
- ACWV 0.53GRIN 1.14
Popular comparisons
- 0.20% · 0.20%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.56% · 0.20%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.20% · 0.25%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.56% · 0.25%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.20% · 0.34%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.56% · 0.34%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.