BINC vs. CRPA.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BINC (iShares Flexible Income Active ETF) and CRPA.L (iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - BINC is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by iShares, while CRPA.L is a Global Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Gbl Agg Corp TR USD. BINC is actively managed, while CRPA.L is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BINC returned 7.02%/yr vs 5.71%/yr for CRPA.L. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BINC charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CRPA.L.

Performance

BINC vs. CRPA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) and iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CRPA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BINC achieves a 0.90% return, which is significantly higher than CRPA.L's -0.13% return.

BINC

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 0.54%
• YTD: 0.90%
• 6M: 1.22%
• 1Y: 5.80%
• 3Y*: 7.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CRPA.L

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: -0.17%
• YTD: -0.13%
• 6M: 0.40%
• 1Y: 5.03%
• 3Y*: 5.71%
• 5Y*: 0.02%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BINC vs. CRPA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	0.90%	7.57%	5.76%	7.08%
CRPA.L iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	-0.13%	9.97%	1.12%	7.34%

Correlation

The correlation between BINC and CRPA.L is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 24, 2023	0.63

The correlation between BINC and CRPA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BINC vs. CRPA.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BINC

BINC Risk / Return Rank: 67
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 83
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 50

CRPA.L

CRPA.L Risk / Return Rank: 28
CRPA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
CRPA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
CRPA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 26
CRPA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
CRPA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 30

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BINC vs. CRPA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) and iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CRPA.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.

	BINC	CRPA.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.56	0.98	+1.58
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	1.43	+2.28
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.17	+0.34
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.17	1.37	+0.79
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.53	4.32	+4.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BINC vs. CRPA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BINC Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is higher than the CRPA.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BINC and CRPA.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BINC	CRPA.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.56	0.98	+1.58
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.00	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.36	0.32	+2.04

Drawdowns

BINC vs. CRPA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BINC drawdown since its inception was -2.69%, smaller than the maximum CRPA.L drawdown of -25.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BINC and CRPA.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	BINC	CRPA.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.69%	-25.34%	+22.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.69%	-3.64%	+0.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-2.69%	-6.08%	+3.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.86%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.49%	-2.08%	+1.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.36%	-7.04%	+6.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.68%	1.16%	-0.48%

Volatility

BINC vs. CRPA.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) is 0.75%, while iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CRPA.L) has a volatility of 1.90%. This indicates that BINC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CRPA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BINC	CRPA.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.75%	1.90%	-1.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.84%	3.93%	-2.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.28%	5.11%	-2.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.00%	6.77%	-3.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.00%	6.78%	-3.78%

BINC vs. CRPA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

BINC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than CRPA.L's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

BINC vs. CRPA.L - Dividend Comparison

BINC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.86%, while CRPA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	5.86%	5.86%	6.14%	3.13%
CRPA.L iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BINC and CRPA.L in my portfolio?

BINC and CRPA.L have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BINC or CRPA.L?

On fees, CRPA.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BINC or CRPA.L?

CRPA.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for BINC.

What is the main difference between BINC and CRPA.L?

BINC is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while CRPA.L is Global Corporate Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for BINC and 0.20% for CRPA.L.