BRIC.AS vs. WLDS.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

BRIC.AS (iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF) and WLDS.L (iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BRIC.AS is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the FTSE BIC 50 Net of Tax Index, while WLDS.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Small Cap Inde. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BRIC.AS returned -9.03%/yr vs 8.18%/yr for WLDS.L. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BRIC.AS charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for WLDS.L.

Performance

BRIC.AS vs. WLDS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (BRIC.AS) and iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF (WLDS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

BRIC.AS is traded in EUR, while WLDS.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the WLDS.L values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BRIC.AS achieves a -16.10% return, which is significantly lower than WLDS.L's 18.90% return.

BRIC.AS

• 1D: -2.87%
• 1M: -9.79%
• YTD: -16.10%
• 6M: -16.03%
• 1Y: -11.96%
• 3Y*: 3.10%
• 5Y*: -9.03%
• 10Y*: 2.05%

WLDS.L

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: 3.67%
• YTD: 18.90%
• 6M: 18.29%
• 1Y: 34.54%
• 3Y*: 16.57%
• 5Y*: 8.18%
• 10Y*: —

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

BRIC.AS vs. WLDS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BRIC.AS iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF	-16.10%	15.29%	19.91%	-10.17%	-24.74%	-17.47%	9.83%	24.15%	-5.71%
WLDS.L iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF	18.90%	5.93%	13.87%	13.62%	-13.59%	24.31%	6.43%	28.07%	-32.87%

Correlation

The correlation between BRIC.AS and WLDS.L is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.32
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2018	0.43

The correlation between BRIC.AS and WLDS.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.32 (3 years) to 0.43 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BRIC.AS vs. WLDS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

BRIC.AS

BRIC.AS Risk / Return Rank: 4
BRIC.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
BRIC.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
BRIC.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 4
BRIC.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
BRIC.AS Martin Ratio Rank: 4

WLDS.L

WLDS.L Risk / Return Rank: 90
WLDS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
WLDS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
WLDS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
WLDS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
WLDS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

BRIC.AS vs. WLDS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (BRIC.AS) and iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF (WLDS.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BRIC.AS	WLDS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.64	2.56	-3.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.80	3.69	-4.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.91	1.45	-0.54
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.49	4.93	-5.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.21	17.88	-19.09

BRIC.AS vs. WLDS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BRIC.AS Sharpe Ratio is -0.64, which is lower than the WLDS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BRIC.AS and WLDS.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.

Drawdowns

BRIC.AS vs. WLDS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BRIC.AS drawdown since its inception was -73.80%, which is greater than WLDS.L's maximum drawdown of -46.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BRIC.AS and WLDS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	BRIC.AS	WLDS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-73.80%	-46.35%	-27.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.22%	-6.98%	-17.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.22%	-23.31%	-0.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.42%	-23.31%	-29.11%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-58.58%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-46.01%	0.00%	-46.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-34.49%	-12.55%	-21.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.86%	1.93%	+7.93%

Volatility

BRIC.AS vs. WLDS.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (BRIC.AS) has a higher volatility of 6.19% compared to iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF (WLDS.L) at 3.30%. This indicates that BRIC.AS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WLDS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BRIC.AS	WLDS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.19%	3.30%	+2.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.19%	9.88%	+3.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.57%	13.43%	+5.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.95%	20.98%	+7.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.59%	23.19%	+2.40%

BRIC.AS vs. WLDS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

BRIC.AS has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than WLDS.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

BRIC.AS vs. WLDS.L - Dividend Comparison

BRIC.AS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.74%, while WLDS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BRIC.AS iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF	1.74%	1.78%	2.75%	2.64%	3.71%	1.56%	1.49%	2.06%	2.99%	1.98%	1.84%	2.72%
WLDS.L iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BRIC.AS and WLDS.L in my portfolio?

BRIC.AS and WLDS.L have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BRIC.AS or WLDS.L?

On fees, WLDS.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BRIC.AS or WLDS.L?

WLDS.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for BRIC.AS.

What is the main difference between BRIC.AS and WLDS.L?

BRIC.AS is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while WLDS.L is Small Cap Blend Equities. BRIC.AS tracks FTSE BIC 50 Net of Tax Index, while WLDS.L tracks MSCI World Small Cap Inde. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for BRIC.AS and 0.35% for WLDS.L.