36BZ.DE vs. IS3N.DE
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (36BZ.DE) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS ETF (Acc) (IS3N.DE).
36BZ.DE and IS3N.DE are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. 36BZ.DE is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI China A Inclusion. It was launched on Apr 8, 2015. IS3N.DE is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market (IMI). It was launched on May 30, 2014. Both 36BZ.DE and IS3N.DE are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: 36BZ.DE or IS3N.DE.
Performance
36BZ.DE vs. IS3N.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading data...
Key characteristics
36BZ.DE:
0.39
IS3N.DE:
0.25
36BZ.DE:
0.71
IS3N.DE:
0.43
36BZ.DE:
1.10
IS3N.DE:
1.06
36BZ.DE:
0.23
IS3N.DE:
0.21
36BZ.DE:
0.60
IS3N.DE:
0.76
36BZ.DE:
16.24%
IS3N.DE:
5.43%
36BZ.DE:
28.57%
IS3N.DE:
17.23%
36BZ.DE:
-53.30%
IS3N.DE:
-35.06%
36BZ.DE:
-31.97%
IS3N.DE:
-2.53%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, 36BZ.DE achieves a -8.35% return, which is significantly lower than IS3N.DE's 3.07% return. Over the past 10 years, 36BZ.DE has underperformed IS3N.DE with an annualized return of -0.75%, while IS3N.DE has yielded a comparatively higher 4.94% annualized return.
36BZ.DE
- YTD
- -8.35%
- 1M
- 0.93%
- 6M
- -3.98%
- 1Y
- 11.29%
- 3Y*
- -9.38%
- 5Y*
- -3.06%
- 10Y*
- -0.75%
IS3N.DE
- YTD
- 3.07%
- 1M
- 1.71%
- 6M
- 2.04%
- 1Y
- 4.32%
- 3Y*
- 5.41%
- 5Y*
- 5.51%
- 10Y*
- 4.94%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
36BZ.DE vs. IS3N.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
36BZ.DE has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than IS3N.DE's 0.18% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
36BZ.DE vs. IS3N.DE — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank
36BZ.DE
IS3N.DE
36BZ.DE vs. IS3N.DE - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (36BZ.DE) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS ETF (Acc) (IS3N.DE). 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.
Loading data...
Correlation
The correlation between 36BZ.DE and IS3N.DE is 0.28, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Dividends
36BZ.DE vs. IS3N.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither 36BZ.DE nor IS3N.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
36BZ.DE vs. IS3N.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum 36BZ.DE drawdown since its inception was -53.30%, which is greater than IS3N.DE's maximum drawdown of -35.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 36BZ.DE and IS3N.DE.
Loading data...
Volatility
36BZ.DE vs. IS3N.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (36BZ.DE) is 2.75%, while iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS ETF (Acc) (IS3N.DE) has a volatility of 3.76%. This indicates that 36BZ.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IS3N.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading data...