PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BRIC.L vs. UC79.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BRIC.L vs. UC79.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP (BRIC.L) and UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC79.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BRIC.L achieves a -9.11% return, which is significantly lower than UC79.L's 33.24% return. Over the past 10 years, BRIC.L has underperformed UC79.L with an annualized return of 3.77%, while UC79.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.59% annualized return.


BRIC.L

1D
-0.42%
1M
-4.88%
YTD
-9.11%
6M
-12.88%
1Y
-1.80%
3Y*
6.39%
5Y*
-6.66%
10Y*
3.77%

UC79.L

1D
-1.64%
1M
6.69%
YTD
33.24%
6M
34.04%
1Y
63.25%
3Y*
24.35%
5Y*
10.24%
10Y*
10.59%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BRIC.L vs. UC79.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BRIC.L
iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP
-9.11%20.80%15.70%-12.64%-20.29%-23.12%15.97%17.97%-3.04%24.05%
UC79.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis
33.24%26.95%10.88%1.14%-11.74%0.32%13.27%6.70%-5.60%20.39%

Correlation

The correlation between BRIC.L and UC79.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

0.70

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.76

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2014

0.80

Over the past year, the correlation between BRIC.L and UC79.L has dropped to 0.60 - well below their long-term average of 0.80, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

BRIC.L vs. UC79.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BRIC.L
UC79.L

Consumer Cyclical

31.8%
11.0%

Financial Services

26.2%
22.6%

Communication Services

18.2%
8.0%

Energy

7.3%
0.2%

Technology

5.6%
38.0%

Basic Materials

5.2%
3.3%

Healthcare

2.5%
3.6%

Real Estate

1.5%
1.3%

Consumer Defensive

1.2%
2.8%

Industrials

0.4%
8.3%

Utilities

-

1.0%

Consumer Cyclical

BRIC.L
31.8%
UC79.L
11.0%

Financial Services

BRIC.L
26.2%
UC79.L
22.6%

Communication Services

BRIC.L
18.2%
UC79.L
8.0%

Energy

BRIC.L
7.3%
UC79.L
0.2%

Technology

BRIC.L
5.6%
UC79.L
38.0%

Basic Materials

BRIC.L
5.2%
UC79.L
3.3%

Healthcare

BRIC.L
2.5%
UC79.L
3.6%

Real Estate

BRIC.L
1.5%
UC79.L
1.3%

Consumer Defensive

BRIC.L
1.2%
UC79.L
2.8%

Industrials

BRIC.L
0.4%
UC79.L
8.3%

Utilities

BRIC.L

-

UC79.L
1.0%

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

BRIC.L vs. UC79.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

BRIC.L
BRIC.L Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
BRIC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BRIC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
BRIC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
BRIC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
BRIC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank

UC79.L
UC79.L Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
UC79.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UC79.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
UC79.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
UC79.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
UC79.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
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.L vs. UC79.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP (BRIC.L) and UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC79.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.


BRIC.LUC79.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.51

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.00

1.57

-0.57

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.07

2.48

-2.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.14

4.47

-4.61

BRIC.L vs. UC79.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BRIC.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.07, which is lower than the UC79.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BRIC.L and UC79.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BRIC.LUC79.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.07

1.44

-1.51

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.23

0.41

-0.64

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.15

0.42

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.12

0.15

-0.02

Drawdowns

BRIC.L vs. UC79.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BRIC.L drawdown since its inception was -63.13%, which is greater than UC79.L's maximum drawdown of -53.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BRIC.L and UC79.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BRIC.LUC79.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-63.13%

-53.04%

-10.09%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-18.84%

-25.91%

+7.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.78%

-25.91%

+3.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-52.50%

-25.91%

-26.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-59.20%

-39.46%

-19.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-41.46%

-2.45%

-39.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.86%

-21.80%

-0.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.59%

14.42%

-5.83%

Volatility

BRIC.L vs. UC79.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP (BRIC.L) is 7.20%, while UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC79.L) has a volatility of 8.44%. This indicates that BRIC.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UC79.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BRIC.LUC79.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.20%

8.44%

-1.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.09%

15.21%

-2.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.29%

44.59%

-26.30%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.81%

24.99%

+3.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.45%

25.01%

+0.44%

BRIC.L vs. UC79.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

BRIC.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than UC79.L's 0.27% expense ratio.


Dividends

BRIC.L vs. UC79.L - Dividend Comparison

BRIC.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, more than UC79.L's 1.59% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BRIC.L
iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP
1.61%1.76%2.77%2.67%3.63%1.60%1.49%2.07%2.95%1.99%1.86%2.62%
UC79.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis
1.59%2.14%1.79%2.38%2.06%1.35%1.81%2.11%2.11%1.97%2.15%1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions


BRIC.L and UC79.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.

On fees, UC79.L is cheaper at 0.27% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

UC79.L is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for BRIC.L.

BRIC.L tracks FTSE BIC 50 Net of Tax Index, while UC79.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for BRIC.L and 0.27% for UC79.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BRIC.L and UC79.L

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