AMED.DE vs. IBCJ.DE
AMED.DE (Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C)) and IBCJ.DE (iShares MSCI Poland UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both Europe Equities funds - AMED.DE tracks the MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select 5% Issuer Capped while IBCJ.DE tracks the MSCI Poland. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AMED.DE returned 9.75%/yr vs 9.17%/yr for IBCJ.DE. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AMED.DE charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for IBCJ.DE.
Performance
AMED.DE vs. IBCJ.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with AMED.DE having a 16.87% return and IBCJ.DE slightly lower at 16.30%. Over the past 10 years, AMED.DE has outperformed IBCJ.DE with an annualized return of 9.75%, while IBCJ.DE has yielded a comparatively lower 9.17% annualized return.
AMED.DE
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- 7.96%
- YTD
- 16.87%
- 6M
- 18.54%
- 1Y
- 26.45%
- 3Y*
- 16.11%
- 5Y*
- 10.41%
- 10Y*
- 9.75%
IBCJ.DE
- 1D
- 0.17%
- 1M
- 5.66%
- YTD
- 16.30%
- 6M
- 25.77%
- 1Y
- 38.98%
- 3Y*
- 29.89%
- 5Y*
- 14.80%
- 10Y*
- 9.17%
AMED.DE vs. IBCJ.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMED.DE Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) | 16.87% | 20.15% | 5.95% | 16.68% | -10.71% | 20.90% | -1.35% | 27.22% | -12.98% | 11.86% |
IBCJ.DE iShares MSCI Poland UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 16.30% | 53.66% | -0.42% | 43.86% | -21.74% | 14.34% | -18.69% | -3.73% | -9.07% | 35.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMED.DE and IBCJ.DE is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 1, 2011 | 0.58 |
The correlation between AMED.DE and IBCJ.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AMED.DE vs. IBCJ.DE — Risk / Return Rank
AMED.DE
IBCJ.DE
AMED.DE vs. IBCJ.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) (AMED.DE) and iShares MSCI Poland UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IBCJ.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.
| AMED.DE | IBCJ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.28 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.49 | 3.90 | -1.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.40 | 9.60 | -0.19 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AMED.DE | IBCJ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.74 | 1.65 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 | 0.55 | +0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.57 | 0.36 | +0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 0.15 | +0.32 |
Drawdowns
AMED.DE vs. IBCJ.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMED.DE drawdown since its inception was -38.35%, smaller than the maximum IBCJ.DE drawdown of -56.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMED.DE and IBCJ.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMED.DE | IBCJ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.35% | -56.11% | +17.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.56% | -9.96% | -0.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.07% | -18.47% | +4.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.06% | -47.31% | +23.25% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.35% | -56.11% | +17.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.17% | -1.16% | +0.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.69% | -19.38% | +12.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.81% | 4.05% | -1.24% |
Volatility
AMED.DE vs. IBCJ.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) (AMED.DE) is 5.61%, while iShares MSCI Poland UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IBCJ.DE) has a volatility of 7.13%. This indicates that AMED.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBCJ.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMED.DE | IBCJ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.61% | 7.13% | -1.52% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.64% | 17.61% | -4.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.19% | 23.48% | -8.29% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.87% | 26.72% | -10.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.00% | 25.15% | -8.15% |
AMED.DE vs. IBCJ.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
AMED.DE has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than IBCJ.DE's 0.74% expense ratio.
Dividends
AMED.DE vs. IBCJ.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither AMED.DE nor IBCJ.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
AMED.DE and IBCJ.DE have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, AMED.DE is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AMED.DE is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for IBCJ.DE.
AMED.DE tracks MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select 5% Issuer Capped, while IBCJ.DE tracks MSCI Poland. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AMED.DE and 0.74% for IBCJ.DE.
Find the right allocation for AMED.DE and IBCJ.DE
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer