AGBP.L vs. SLXX.L
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (AGBP.L) and iShares Core £ Corp Bond UCITS ETF (SLXX.L).
AGBP.L and SLXX.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. AGBP.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg Global Aggregate TR Hdg GBP. It was launched on Nov 21, 2017. SLXX.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Markit iBoxx GBP Liquid Corporates Large Cap Index. It was launched on Mar 29, 2004. Both AGBP.L and SLXX.L 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: AGBP.L or SLXX.L.
Key characteristics
| AGBP.L | SLXX.L | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 0.94% | 0.23% |
| 1Y Return | 4.46% | 8.65% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -3.36% | -4.54% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | -1.74% | -1.26% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.96 | 1.30 |
| Daily Std Dev | 4.67% | 6.60% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.79% | -30.27% |
| Current Drawdown | -11.90% | -14.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between AGBP.L and SLXX.L is 0.86, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
AGBP.L vs. SLXX.L - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, AGBP.L achieves a 0.94% return, which is significantly higher than SLXX.L's 0.23% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
AGBP.L vs. SLXX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
AGBP.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than SLXX.L's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
AGBP.L vs. SLXX.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (AGBP.L) and iShares Core £ Corp Bond UCITS ETF (SLXX.L). 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.
Dividends
AGBP.L vs. SLXX.L - Dividend Comparison
AGBP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.65%, less than SLXX.L's 4.51% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGBP.L iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 2.65% | 91.82% | 156.06% | 127.45% | 153.09% | 164.90% | 97.62% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SLXX.L iShares Core £ Corp Bond UCITS ETF | 4.51% | 4.06% | 2.75% | 2.06% | 2.12% | 2.44% | 2.71% | 2.73% | 2.99% | 3.39% | 3.41% | 3.74% |
Drawdowns
AGBP.L vs. SLXX.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AGBP.L drawdown since its inception was -18.79%, smaller than the maximum SLXX.L drawdown of -30.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGBP.L and SLXX.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
AGBP.L vs. SLXX.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (AGBP.L) has a higher volatility of 2.22% compared to iShares Core £ Corp Bond UCITS ETF (SLXX.L) at 2.11%. This indicates that AGBP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SLXX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.