FTSE All-World vs MSCI ACWI
The two most-held single-fund global equity wrappers in UK retail. Vanguard's VWRL / VWRP tracks the FTSE All-World; iShares' SSAC and similar track the MSCI ACWI. Same investment thesis — "own the whole world" — different index providers, slightly different constituents, slightly different costs. Here's where they actually differ.
The trackers in question
| Ticker | Full name | Index | OCF | Acc / Dist |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VWRL | Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS | FTSE All-World | 0.22% | Dist |
| VWRP | Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS (Acc) | FTSE All-World | 0.22% | Acc |
| FWRG | Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS (Acc) | FTSE All-World | 0.15% | Acc |
| SSAC | iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS | MSCI ACWI | 0.20% | Acc |
| ISAC | iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS | MSCI ACWI | 0.20% | Dist |
| IWDA | iShares Core MSCI World UCITS (Acc) | MSCI World (no EM) | 0.20% | Acc |
Note: IWDA (MSCI World) is a developed-only index — doesn't include emerging markets. To get full-world exposure with iShares you'd combine IWDA + EIMI, or use SSAC/ISAC.
The two indices — how they differ
FTSE All-World (Vanguard's choice)
- Constituents: ~4,200 large-cap and mid-cap companies
- Coverage: 49 markets, including developed and emerging
- Provider: FTSE Russell (part of LSEG)
- Korea classification: Developed market
- Poland classification: Developed market
- Saudi Arabia classification: Emerging market
MSCI ACWI (iShares' choice)
- Constituents: ~3,000 large-cap and mid-cap companies
- Coverage: 47 markets, developed + emerging
- Provider: MSCI
- Korea classification: Emerging market
- Poland classification: Emerging market
- Saudi Arabia classification: Emerging market
The biggest difference is South Korea. FTSE puts Korea in developed; MSCI puts it in emerging. Samsung Electronics (Korea's biggest company) is therefore in FTSE's "developed" bucket but in MSCI's "emerging" bucket. The actual exposure is identical in both indices (Korea is included in both), but the labelling differs — relevant if you ever combine the global tracker with a separate EM tracker.
The other meaningful difference: FTSE All-World includes ~1,200 more constituents than MSCI ACWI, mostly small mid-caps. The economic exposure is very similar (the missing names are tiny by weight) but the diversification is technically broader.
Actual portfolio overlap
The two indices overlap on ~95% of total market cap. The same top 10 companies (Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla, Berkshire, TSMC, Eli Lilly) dominate both. Sector weights are nearly identical. Country weights are nearly identical except for the Korea labelling and small differences from the long tail of mid-caps.
For practical investment purposes, the two indices deliver almost the same return. Empirical correlation 2014–2024 is around 0.998 — effectively identical movement.
Real cost comparison — the OCF is only part of it
VWRP (0.22% OCF) vs SSAC (0.20% OCF) seems like SSAC wins on OCF. But:
- Tracking difference: VWRP typically tracks within ~0.10% of FTSE All-World total return. SSAC typically tracks within ~0.08% of MSCI ACWI. Both excellent, marginal difference.
- Securities lending pass-through: Vanguard passes ~100% of lending revenue back to the fund; iShares passes ~62.5%. This narrows the effective OCF gap. For a fund earning 0.05% gross lending revenue: VWRP keeps 0.05%; SSAC keeps 0.031%. Net effective OCF: VWRP 0.17%, SSAC 0.169%. Effectively identical.
- Bid-ask spread: VWRP and SSAC both have spreads of ~0.05% in normal hours. Marginal difference.
The cheaper option is actually FWRG (Invesco FTSE All-World Acc, 0.15% OCF) — same index as VWRP but launched as a 2023 challenger. FWRG is synthetic (swap-based) rather than physical, and it's still building AUM, so platform availability is patchier and trading liquidity is thinner. For investors who can access it, FWRG offers a roughly 0.07% per year cost advantage over VWRP — meaningful over decades.
20-year cost projection on £50,000
Same investment, same expected gross return (7% per year):
- VWRP (0.22% OCF): net return 6.78%/yr. End value: ~£185,500.
- SSAC (0.20% OCF): net return 6.80%/yr. End value: ~£186,400. Gap: ~£900.
- FWRG (0.15% OCF): net return 6.85%/yr. End value: ~£188,200. Gap from VWRP: ~£2,700.
Costs matter but the magnitudes are modest. The bigger driver of your end value is whether the gross market return is 5%, 7% or 9% — and that's entirely outside your control. Don't agonise over 0.02% OCF differences if you've got the underlying allocation right.
Platform availability matters more than OCF
- Vanguard platform: VWRL/VWRP/VUKE/VUSA only. No SSAC, no FWRG.
- Hargreaves Lansdown, AJ Bell, ii, Fidelity: all three (VWRP, SSAC, FWRG) available.
- Trading 212, Lightyear, Freetrade: VWRP and SSAC widely available; FWRG patchy — check before assuming.
- iWeb, Halifax Share Dealing: VWRP and SSAC; FWRG sometimes.
Decision framework
Pick VWRP if...
- You're on the Vanguard platform (only Vanguard funds available)
- You want the bigger constituent count (4,200 vs 3,000) for marginally broader diversification
- You prefer Vanguard's near-100% securities lending pass-through and prefer the fund family's mutual-ownership structure
- You want the highest trading liquidity of the three (VWRP is the largest of these by AUM)
Pick SSAC (or ISAC for Dist) if...
- You're on a non-Vanguard platform where it's available
- You prefer the iShares fund family (lower OCF, larger global presence)
- You also hold iShares ETFs in other allocations and prefer fund-family consistency
- You want MSCI's Korea-in-EM classification (relevant if combining with EIMI, the iShares EM tracker, so you don't double-count Korea)
Pick FWRG if...
- You want the lowest OCF (0.15%) and accept synthetic replication
- Your platform offers it
- You're willing to deal with potentially wider bid-ask spreads given lower AUM
- You're holding for >10 years (the OCF advantage compounds; the synthetic structure's marginal counterparty risk is a one-time exposure)
A common mistake: IWDA vs VWRP
UK retail investors often default to IWDA without realising it's NOT a full-world tracker. IWDA tracks MSCI World — developed markets only. It excludes emerging markets (~10% of global market cap including China, India, Brazil, Korea by MSCI's definition).
If you hold IWDA alone, you have no exposure to:
- China (Tencent, Alibaba, ICBC, etc.)
- India (HDFC Bank, Reliance Industries, Infosys, etc.)
- Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Korea (in MSCI's view), Taiwan
To get full-world exposure with iShares, combine IWDA + EIMI at roughly 90/10 weights, or use SSAC (which is MSCI ACWI = MSCI World + EM in one fund).
VWRP includes emerging markets automatically (it's the All-World index). So VWRP is closer to SSAC than to IWDA in coverage. For an investor wanting "the whole world in one ticker", VWRP or SSAC are the right choices, not IWDA.
Frequently asked questions
Why is FWRG so much cheaper than VWRP?
FWRG is a synthetic ETF (uses total return swaps) while VWRP is physical (holds the underlying basket). Synthetic replication has lower operational cost because it avoids transaction costs in 4,000+ underlying names. Invesco prices FWRG aggressively to win share from Vanguard. The trade-off is counterparty risk, but UCITS rules cap this at 10% of fund value per counterparty, with collateral required.
Does the bigger constituent count in FTSE All-World really matter?
Marginally. The extra ~1,200 mid-caps in FTSE All-World vs MSCI ACWI add about 3% of market cap weight in total. The economic exposure is very similar. For a buy-and-hold UK retail investor, the difference is invisible in returns over any reasonable timeframe.
Is one provider's tracking better than the other?
Both Vanguard and iShares run their respective indices very tightly. Trailing 3-year tracking differences for VWRP and SSAC are both within 0.10% of their indices. Tracking error is similar. Neither has a structural edge for retail purposes.
What if I want to overweight one region?
Then use a single-region ETF on top of one of these. E.g. VWRP (or SSAC) for global exposure, plus VUSA (or CSPX) for an extra US tilt, plus VUKE for an extra UK tilt. Be aware of the implicit overweights and rebalance accordingly.
What about VWRD or other variants?
VWRD is the USD-denominated share class of the same Vanguard FTSE All-World fund. Same fund, USD-quoted. For UK investors there's no benefit — you'd pay FX cost to convert GBP to USD to buy it, when the GBP-quoted VWRL/VWRP gives you the same economic exposure without FX friction. Stick with GBP share classes.
Related guides
How UK Tax Drag holds itself to account
Every page is reviewed against the editorial standards, written from primary sources, sourced openly, and corrected publicly. No affiliate revenue. No sponsored content. No paid placements.