CIND.L vs. XMVU.L
CIND.L (iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc) and XMVU.L (Xtrackers MSCI USA Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF 1D) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds tracking the Russell 1000 TR USD, from iShares and Xtrackers respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CIND.L returned 9.37%/yr vs 7.26%/yr for XMVU.L. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CIND.L charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XMVU.L.
Performance
CIND.L vs. XMVU.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CIND.L achieves a 5.75% return, which is significantly higher than XMVU.L's 2.25% return.
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%
XMVU.L
- 1D
- 0.19%
- 1M
- 1.80%
- YTD
- 2.25%
- 6M
- 2.94%
- 1Y
- 4.87%
- 3Y*
- 11.75%
- 5Y*
- 7.26%
- 10Y*
- —
CIND.L vs. XMVU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
XMVU.L Xtrackers MSCI USA Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF 1D | 2.25% | 7.94% | 15.67% | 9.79% | -9.53% | 21.63% | 4.38% | 24.92% | -1.18% | 18.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIND.L and XMVU.L is 0.60, 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 | 0.60 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2016 | 0.79 |
The correlation between CIND.L and XMVU.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (1 year) to 0.80 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CIND.L vs. XMVU.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CIND.L
XMVU.L
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Energy
Communication Services
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
CIND.L
XMVU.L
Technology
CIND.L
XMVU.L
Industrials
CIND.L
XMVU.L
Healthcare
CIND.L
XMVU.L
Consumer Cyclical
CIND.L
XMVU.L
Consumer Defensive
CIND.L
XMVU.L
Basic Materials
CIND.L
XMVU.L
Energy
CIND.L
XMVU.L
Communication Services
CIND.L
XMVU.L
Real Estate
CIND.L
-
XMVU.L
Utilities
CIND.L
-
XMVU.L
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. XMVU.L — Risk / Return Rank
CIND.L
XMVU.L
CIND.L vs. XMVU.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 Xtrackers MSCI USA Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF 1D (XMVU.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.L | XMVU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.12 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.81 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.11 | +0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.24 | 0.90 | +1.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.13 | 2.80 | +5.34 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CIND.L | XMVU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.75 | 0.63 | +1.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 | 0.63 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.80 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.83 | 0.75 | +0.08 |
Drawdowns
CIND.L vs. XMVU.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIND.L drawdown since its inception was -36.68%, which is greater than XMVU.L's maximum drawdown of -32.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIND.L and XMVU.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CIND.L | XMVU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.68% | -32.98% | -3.70% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.44% | -5.39% | -4.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.44% | -10.00% | -6.44% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.90% | -17.74% | -2.16% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.68% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.61% | -0.42% | -0.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.67% | -3.70% | +0.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.61% | 1.74% | +0.87% |
Volatility
CIND.L vs. XMVU.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) has a higher volatility of 3.18% compared to Xtrackers MSCI USA Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF 1D (XMVU.L) at 2.32%. This indicates that CIND.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMVU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CIND.L | XMVU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.18% | 2.32% | +0.86% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.08% | 5.35% | +3.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.13% | 7.67% | +4.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.37% | 11.57% | +2.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.98% | 13.13% | +2.85% |
CIND.L vs. XMVU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIND.L has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is higher than XMVU.L's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
CIND.L vs. XMVU.L - Dividend Comparison
CIND.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XMVU.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
XMVU.L Xtrackers MSCI USA Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF 1D | 1.18% | 1.24% | 1.31% | 1.33% | 1.82% | 1.27% | 1.81% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CIND.L and XMVU.L have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XMVU.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XMVU.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CIND.L.
Both ETFs track Russell 1000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CIND.L and 0.20% for XMVU.L.
Find the right allocation for CIND.L and XMVU.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