PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CEMF.DE vs. IBCC.DE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CEMF.DE vs. IBCC.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in iShares $ Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Acc (CEMF.DE) and iShares $ Treasury Bond 0-1yr UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IBCC.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEMF.DE achieves a -1.56% return, which is significantly lower than IBCC.DE's 5.08% return.


CEMF.DE

1D
0.00%
1M
0.05%
6M
-0.81%
YTD
-1.56%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*

IBCC.DE

1D
0.46%
1M
0.92%
6M
4.10%
YTD
5.08%
1Y
6.32%
3Y*
3.78%
5Y*
4.22%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
0.95%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CEMF.DE vs. IBCC.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CEMF.DE and IBCC.DE is -0.37, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 4, 2025

-0.37

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

CEMF.DE vs. IBCC.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEMF.DE

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.


IBCC.DE
IBCC.DE Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
IBCC.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBCC.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBCC.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
IBCC.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBCC.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
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.

CEMF.DE vs. IBCC.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares $ Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Acc (CEMF.DE) and iShares $ Treasury Bond 0-1yr UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IBCC.DE). 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.


CEMF.DEIBCC.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.94

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.46

CEMF.DE vs. IBCC.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CEMF.DE vs. IBCC.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEMF.DE drawdown since its inception was -4.45%, smaller than the maximum IBCC.DE drawdown of -16.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMF.DE and IBCC.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CEMF.DEIBCC.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.45%

-16.17%

+11.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-11.69%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.11%

-4.90%

+1.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.45%

-7.97%

+6.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.42%

Volatility

CEMF.DE vs. IBCC.DE - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CEMF.DEIBCC.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.43%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.50%

6.01%

-1.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.50%

7.57%

-3.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.50%

8.41%

-3.91%

CEMF.DE vs. IBCC.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEMF.DE has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is higher than IBCC.DE'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%.


Dividends

CEMF.DE vs. IBCC.DE - Dividend Comparison

CEMF.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBCC.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.97%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
CEMF.DE
iShares $ Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IBCC.DE
iShares $ Treasury Bond 0-1yr UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
3.97%4.63%6.49%4.14%0.47%0.09%1.39%1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions


CEMF.DE and IBCC.DE have a correlation of -0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IBCC.DE is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IBCC.DE is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.10% for CEMF.DE.

CEMF.DE tracks ICE US Treasury 7-10 Year (EUR Hedged) Index, while IBCC.DE tracks ICE US Treasury Short Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for CEMF.DE and 0.07% for IBCC.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CEMF.DE and IBCC.DE

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