BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BYBG.L (Amundi S&P 500 Buyback ETF-C USD) and IUMS.L (iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both S&P 500 funds - BYBG.L tracks the S&P 500 Buyback NTR while IUMS.L tracks the S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Materials Index NTR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BYBG.L returned 11.34%/yr vs 6.04%/yr for IUMS.L. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.

Performance

BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi S&P 500 Buyback ETF-C USD (BYBG.L) and iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

BYBG.L is traded in GBp, while IUMS.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IUMS.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BYBG.L achieves a 8.46% return, which is significantly lower than IUMS.L's 12.98% return.

BYBG.L

• 1D: 0.96%
• 1M: 5.09%
• YTD: 8.46%
• 6M: 8.43%
• 1Y: 23.95%
• 3Y*: 15.56%
• 5Y*: 11.34%
• 10Y*: 13.89%

IUMS.L

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 1.67%
• YTD: 12.98%
• 6M: 15.93%
• 1Y: 19.40%
• 3Y*: 8.27%
• 5Y*: 6.04%
• 10Y*: —

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

BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BYBG.L Amundi S&P 500 Buyback ETF-C USD	8.46%	9.41%	15.83%	9.58%	-1.29%	35.95%	1.99%	26.54%	-3.60%	9.23%
IUMS.L iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	12.94%	3.00%	0.81%	6.79%	-1.42%	28.13%	17.00%	18.25%	-10.68%	10.12%

Correlation

The correlation between BYBG.L and IUMS.L is 0.59, 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	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2017	0.75

The correlation between BYBG.L and IUMS.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.75 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BYBG.L	IUMS.L
Financial Services	27.9%	-
Technology	22.4%	-
Consumer Cyclical	15.8%	8.5%
Industrials	9.0%	1.1%
Healthcare	7.5%	-
Energy	5.2%	-
Communication Services	4.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	-
Basic Materials	3.1%	91.5%
Utilities	0.9%	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

BYBG.L

BYBG.L Risk / Return Rank: 71
BYBG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
BYBG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
BYBG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 63
BYBG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
BYBG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 74

IUMS.L

IUMS.L Risk / Return Rank: 31
IUMS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
IUMS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
IUMS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 29
IUMS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
IUMS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi S&P 500 Buyback ETF-C USD (BYBG.L) and iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.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.

	BYBG.L	IUMS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.15	1.20	+0.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.99	1.71	+1.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.21	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.88	1.78	+3.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.84	6.15	+7.69
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BYBG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is higher than the IUMS.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BYBG.L and IUMS.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

	BYBG.L	IUMS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.15	1.20	+0.95
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75	0.35	+0.40
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.77	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.68	0.45	+0.23

Drawdowns

BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BYBG.L drawdown since its inception was -35.57%, which is greater than IUMS.L's maximum drawdown of -28.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BYBG.L and IUMS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	BYBG.L	IUMS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.57%	-28.94%	-6.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.86%	-10.82%	+5.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.63%	-21.83%	+1.20%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.63%	-21.83%	+1.20%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.57%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-2.96%	+2.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.68%	-5.57%	+0.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.72%	3.15%	-1.43%

Volatility

BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amundi S&P 500 Buyback ETF-C USD (BYBG.L) is 2.72%, while iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.L) has a volatility of 5.73%. This indicates that BYBG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IUMS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BYBG.L	IUMS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.72%	5.73%	-3.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.49%	13.27%	-5.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.02%	16.08%	-5.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.15%	17.42%	-2.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.02%	19.28%	-1.26%

BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BYBG.L and IUMS.L have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

BYBG.L vs. IUMS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither BYBG.L nor IUMS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BYBG.L and IUMS.L in my portfolio?

BYBG.L and IUMS.L have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BYBG.L or IUMS.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BYBG.L or IUMS.L?

BYBG.L and IUMS.L have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

What is the main difference between BYBG.L and IUMS.L?

BYBG.L tracks S&P 500 Buyback NTR, while IUMS.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Materials Index NTR. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares.