PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
COMM.L vs. IWFQ.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

COMM.L vs. IWFQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (COMM.L) and iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COMM.L achieves a 19.66% return, which is significantly higher than IWFQ.L's 10.34% return.


COMM.L

1D
-0.94%
1M
1.10%
6M
14.90%
YTD
19.66%
1Y
29.14%
3Y*
11.41%
5Y*
10.66%
10Y*

IWFQ.L

1D
-0.35%
1M
0.31%
6M
8.68%
YTD
10.34%
1Y
20.01%
3Y*
15.88%
5Y*
10.66%
10Y*
12.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

COMM.L vs. IWFQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
COMM.L
iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF
19.66%8.53%6.19%-12.55%28.34%29.04%-7.09%3.39%-5.05%-21.66%
IWFQ.L
iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS
10.34%7.40%18.93%19.15%-9.55%25.17%10.93%25.86%-2.34%6.11%

Correlation

The correlation between COMM.L and IWFQ.L is -0.15, 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.15

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

0.07

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

0.11

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2017

0.25

The correlation between COMM.L and IWFQ.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to 0.25 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

COMM.L vs. IWFQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

COMM.L
COMM.L Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
COMM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COMM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
COMM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
COMM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
COMM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank

IWFQ.L
IWFQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
IWFQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWFQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

COMM.L vs. IWFQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (COMM.L) and iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.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.

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.


COMM.LIWFQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.37

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.19

2.84

-0.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.80

12.06

-5.25

COMM.L vs. IWFQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COMM.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is comparable to the IWFQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COMM.L and IWFQ.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...

Drawdowns

COMM.L vs. IWFQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COMM.L drawdown since its inception was -40.38%, roughly equal to the maximum IWFQ.L drawdown of -40.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COMM.L and IWFQ.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


COMM.LIWFQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.38%

-40.49%

+0.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.24%

-7.01%

-6.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.75%

-20.20%

-6.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.49%

-20.20%

-8.29%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-23.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.96%

-0.89%

-8.07%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.50%

-8.92%

-10.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.27%

1.66%

+2.61%

Volatility

COMM.L vs. IWFQ.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Diversified Commodity Swap UCITS ETF (COMM.L) has a higher volatility of 4.62% compared to iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L) at 2.57%. This indicates that COMM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWFQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


COMM.LIWFQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.62%

2.57%

+2.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.60%

7.40%

+9.20%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.51%

9.91%

+8.60%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.24%

19.21%

+2.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.67%

17.26%

+2.41%

COMM.L vs. IWFQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

COMM.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than IWFQ.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

COMM.L vs. IWFQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither COMM.L nor IWFQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


COMM.L and IWFQ.L have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, COMM.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

COMM.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for IWFQ.L.

COMM.L is categorized as Commodities, while IWFQ.L is Global Equities. COMM.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity, while IWFQ.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for COMM.L and 0.30% for IWFQ.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for COMM.L and IWFQ.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