PortfoliosLab logo
Tools
Performance Analysis
Risk Analysis
Optimization
Factor Model
See All Tools
Portfolio Analysis
Portfolios
Lazy PortfoliosUser Portfolios
Discussions
CIND.L vs. XLG
Performance
Risk-Adjusted Performance
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Key characteristics


CIND.LXLG
YTD Return3.63%11.86%
1Y Return17.69%33.48%
3Y Return (Ann)5.38%11.36%
5Y Return (Ann)10.45%16.84%
10Y Return (Ann)10.71%14.29%
Sharpe Ratio1.842.51
Daily Std Dev9.54%13.44%
Max Drawdown-36.68%-52.38%
Current Drawdown-2.23%-0.45%

Correlation

-0.50.00.51.00.4

The correlation between CIND.L and XLG is 0.41, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Performance

CIND.L vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

In the year-to-date period, CIND.L achieves a 3.63% return, which is significantly lower than XLG's 11.86% return. Over the past 10 years, CIND.L has underperformed XLG with an annualized return of 10.71%, while XLG has yielded a comparatively higher 14.29% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.


300.00%350.00%400.00%450.00%500.00%550.00%December2024FebruaryMarchAprilMay
363.07%
559.00%
CIND.L
XLG

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc

Invesco S&P 500® Top 50 ETF

CIND.L vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


CIND.L
iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc
Expense ratio chart for CIND.L: current value at 0.33% compared with the broader market ranging from 0.00% to 2.12%.0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%0.33%
Expense ratio chart for XLG: current value at 0.20% compared with the broader market ranging from 0.00% to 2.12%.0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%0.20%

Risk-Adjusted Performance

CIND.L vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Performance 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 Invesco S&P 500® Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.L
Sharpe ratio
The chart of Sharpe ratio for CIND.L, currently valued at 1.95, compared to the broader market0.002.004.001.95
Sortino ratio
The chart of Sortino ratio for CIND.L, currently valued at 2.95, compared to the broader market-2.000.002.004.006.008.0010.002.95
Omega ratio
The chart of Omega ratio for CIND.L, currently valued at 1.36, compared to the broader market0.501.001.502.002.501.36
Calmar ratio
The chart of Calmar ratio for CIND.L, currently valued at 1.94, compared to the broader market0.002.004.006.008.0010.0012.0014.001.94
Martin ratio
The chart of Martin ratio for CIND.L, currently valued at 7.10, compared to the broader market0.0020.0040.0060.0080.007.10
XLG
Sharpe ratio
The chart of Sharpe ratio for XLG, currently valued at 2.47, compared to the broader market0.002.004.002.47
Sortino ratio
The chart of Sortino ratio for XLG, currently valued at 3.47, compared to the broader market-2.000.002.004.006.008.0010.003.47
Omega ratio
The chart of Omega ratio for XLG, currently valued at 1.44, compared to the broader market0.501.001.502.002.501.44
Calmar ratio
The chart of Calmar ratio for XLG, currently valued at 2.51, compared to the broader market0.002.004.006.008.0010.0012.0014.002.51
Martin ratio
The chart of Martin ratio for XLG, currently valued at 13.45, compared to the broader market0.0020.0040.0060.0080.0013.45

CIND.L vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CIND.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which roughly equals the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.51. The chart below compares the 12-month rolling Sharpe Ratio of CIND.L and XLG.


Rolling 12-month Sharpe Ratio0.001.002.003.004.00December2024FebruaryMarchAprilMay
1.95
2.47
CIND.L
XLG

Dividends

CIND.L vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

CIND.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.85%.


TTM20232022202120202019201820172016201520142013
CIND.L
iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XLG
Invesco S&P 500® Top 50 ETF
0.85%0.97%1.34%0.93%1.25%1.58%2.00%1.86%1.99%2.09%1.97%1.98%

Drawdowns

CIND.L vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIND.L drawdown since its inception was -36.68%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIND.L and XLG. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.


-6.00%-5.00%-4.00%-3.00%-2.00%-1.00%0.00%December2024FebruaryMarchAprilMay
-2.23%
-0.45%
CIND.L
XLG

Volatility

CIND.L vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) is 3.31%, while Invesco S&P 500® Top 50 ETF (XLG) has a volatility of 5.01%. This indicates that CIND.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


1.00%2.00%3.00%4.00%5.00%December2024FebruaryMarchAprilMay
3.31%
5.01%
CIND.L
XLG