CSSPX.MI vs. INRG.L
CSSPX.MI (iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and INRG.L (iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - CSSPX.MI is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while INRG.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CSSPX.MI returned 15.03%/yr vs 11.96%/yr for INRG.L. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CSSPX.MI charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for INRG.L.
Performance
CSSPX.MI vs. INRG.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CSSPX.MI is traded in EUR, while INRG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the INRG.L values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CSSPX.MI achieves a 11.49% return, which is significantly lower than INRG.L's 43.31% return. Over the past 10 years, CSSPX.MI has outperformed INRG.L with an annualized return of 15.03%, while INRG.L has yielded a comparatively lower 11.96% annualized return.
CSSPX.MI
- 1D
- -0.28%
- 1M
- 6.11%
- YTD
- 11.49%
- 6M
- 11.63%
- 1Y
- 25.71%
- 3Y*
- 19.09%
- 5Y*
- 14.80%
- 10Y*
- 15.03%
INRG.L
- 1D
- -1.20%
- 1M
- 12.68%
- YTD
- 43.31%
- 6M
- 41.62%
- 1Y
- 81.71%
- 3Y*
- 6.34%
- 5Y*
- 3.02%
- 10Y*
- 11.96%
CSSPX.MI vs. INRG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSSPX.MI iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 11.49% | 4.27% | 33.76% | 22.03% | -14.58% | 40.89% | 7.57% | 34.27% | -1.05% | 6.71% |
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 43.22% | 27.72% | -20.75% | -22.22% | 0.08% | -18.75% | 122.45% | 48.07% | -3.86% | 6.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between CSSPX.MI and INRG.L is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2010 | 0.52 |
The correlation between CSSPX.MI and INRG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (3 years) to 0.52 (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
CSSPX.MI vs. INRG.L — Risk / Return Rank
CSSPX.MI
INRG.L
CSSPX.MI vs. INRG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CSSPX.MI) and iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.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.
| CSSPX.MI | INRG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.52 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.60 | 6.73 | -3.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.82 | 21.02 | -8.20 |
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
| CSSPX.MI | INRG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.24 | 3.36 | -1.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.97 | 0.12 | +0.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.93 | 0.47 | +0.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.93 | -0.01 | +0.94 |
Drawdowns
CSSPX.MI vs. INRG.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CSSPX.MI drawdown since its inception was -33.56%, smaller than the maximum INRG.L drawdown of -86.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSSPX.MI and INRG.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CSSPX.MI | INRG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.56% | -86.35% | +52.79% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.14% | -12.07% | +4.93% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.26% | -43.88% | +20.62% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.26% | -57.27% | +34.01% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.56% | -63.45% | +29.89% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.28% | -25.00% | +24.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.10% | -59.83% | +55.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.01% | 3.87% | -1.86% |
Volatility
CSSPX.MI vs. INRG.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CSSPX.MI) is 2.69%, while iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L) has a volatility of 9.33%. This indicates that CSSPX.MI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than INRG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CSSPX.MI | INRG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.69% | 9.33% | -6.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.54% | 17.91% | -10.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.56% | 24.27% | -12.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.18% | 24.99% | -9.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.09% | 25.61% | -9.52% |
CSSPX.MI vs. INRG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CSSPX.MI has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than INRG.L's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
CSSPX.MI vs. INRG.L - Dividend Comparison
CSSPX.MI has not paid dividends to shareholders, while INRG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.07%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSSPX.MI iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS 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% |
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.07% | 1.77% | 1.58% | 1.00% | 0.62% | 1.01% | 0.61% | 2.05% | 3.68% | 3.69% | 3.65% | 3.90% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CSSPX.MI and INRG.L have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CSSPX.MI is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CSSPX.MI is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for INRG.L.
CSSPX.MI is categorized as S&P 500, while INRG.L is Energy Equities. CSSPX.MI tracks S&P 500 Index, while INRG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for CSSPX.MI and 0.65% for INRG.L.
Find the right allocation for CSSPX.MI and INRG.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