PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CIND.L vs. IWDA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CIND.L vs. IWDA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) and iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIND.L achieves a 5.75% return, which is significantly lower than IWDA.L's 9.72% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CIND.L having a 12.77% annualized return and IWDA.L not far ahead at 13.16%.


CIND.L

1D
-0.61%
1M
2.56%
YTD
5.75%
6M
7.17%
1Y
21.24%
3Y*
16.20%
5Y*
9.37%
10Y*
12.77%

IWDA.L

1D
-0.53%
1M
3.71%
YTD
9.72%
6M
11.08%
1Y
26.39%
3Y*
20.81%
5Y*
11.83%
10Y*
13.16%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CIND.L vs. IWDA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CIND.L
iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc
5.75%14.46%14.71%15.66%-7.56%20.97%8.76%24.22%-4.90%27.62%
IWDA.L
iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
9.72%21.03%19.11%24.27%-18.11%22.19%16.06%27.13%-9.01%22.77%

Correlation

The correlation between CIND.L and IWDA.L is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.82

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.82

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

0.86

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

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2012

0.87

The correlation between CIND.L and IWDA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

CIND.L vs. IWDA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CIND.L
IWDA.L

Financial Services

27.4%
14.9%

Technology

18.2%
32.9%

Industrials

18.0%
9.7%

Healthcare

13.2%
8.6%

Consumer Cyclical

11.0%
8.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.2%
4.8%

Basic Materials

3.8%
2.8%

Energy

2.3%
3.9%

Communication Services

1.8%
9.3%

Real Estate

-

1.2%

Utilities

-

2.4%

Financial Services

CIND.L
27.4%
IWDA.L
14.9%

Technology

CIND.L
18.2%
IWDA.L
32.9%

Industrials

CIND.L
18.0%
IWDA.L
9.7%

Healthcare

CIND.L
13.2%
IWDA.L
8.6%

Consumer Cyclical

CIND.L
11.0%
IWDA.L
8.8%

Consumer Defensive

CIND.L
4.2%
IWDA.L
4.8%

Basic Materials

CIND.L
3.8%
IWDA.L
2.8%

Energy

CIND.L
2.3%
IWDA.L
3.9%

Communication Services

CIND.L
1.8%
IWDA.L
9.3%

Real Estate

CIND.L

-

IWDA.L
1.2%

Utilities

CIND.L

-

IWDA.L
2.4%

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

CIND.L vs. IWDA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CIND.L
CIND.L Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
CIND.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIND.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIND.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
CIND.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIND.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
Martin Ratio Rank

IWDA.L
IWDA.L Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
IWDA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
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.

CIND.L vs. IWDA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) and iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.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.


CIND.LIWDA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.40

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.24

3.16

-0.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.13

13.37

-5.24

CIND.L vs. IWDA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CIND.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the IWDA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CIND.L and IWDA.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


CIND.LIWDA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.75

2.20

-0.45

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

0.75

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.80

0.83

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.83

0.79

+0.04

Drawdowns

CIND.L vs. IWDA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIND.L drawdown since its inception was -36.68%, which is greater than IWDA.L's maximum drawdown of -34.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIND.L and IWDA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CIND.LIWDA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.68%

-34.11%

-2.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.44%

-8.31%

-1.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.44%

-16.94%

+0.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.90%

-25.88%

+5.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.68%

-34.11%

-2.57%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.61%

-0.53%

-0.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.67%

-4.44%

+0.77%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.61%

1.97%

+0.64%

Volatility

CIND.L vs. IWDA.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) is 3.18%, while iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.L) has a volatility of 3.42%. This indicates that CIND.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWDA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CIND.LIWDA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.18%

3.42%

-0.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.08%

9.20%

-0.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.13%

11.95%

+0.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.37%

15.68%

-1.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.98%

15.91%

+0.07%

CIND.L vs. IWDA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CIND.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than IWDA.L's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

CIND.L vs. IWDA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CIND.L nor IWDA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CIND.L and IWDA.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IWDA.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IWDA.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CIND.L.

CIND.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while IWDA.L is Global Equities. CIND.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while IWDA.L tracks MSCI World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CIND.L and 0.20% for IWDA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CIND.L and IWDA.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