CEA1.L vs. CSPX.L

In the year-to-date period, CEA1.L achieves a 0.20% return, which is significantly higher than CSPX.L's -0.17% return. Over the past 10 years, CEA1.L has underperformed CSPX.L with an annualized return of 5.78%, while CSPX.L has yielded a comparatively higher 12.52% annualized return.

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

CEA1.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than CSPX.L's 0.07% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.L) and iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CSPX.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.

The current CEA1.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.37, which is lower than the CSPX.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEA1.L and CSPX.L, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Neither CEA1.L nor CSPX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

The maximum CEA1.L drawdown since its inception was -33.94%, roughly equal to the maximum CSPX.L drawdown of -33.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEA1.L and CSPX.L.

iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.L) has a higher volatility of 5.18% compared to iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CSPX.L) at 3.98%. This indicates that CEA1.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSPX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.