ERNA.L vs. ICLU.L
ERNA.L (iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and ICLU.L (Invesco USD AAA CLO UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - ERNA.L is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Corp 1-3 Yr TR USD, while ICLU.L is a CLO fund actively managed by Invesco. ERNA.L is passively managed, while ICLU.L is actively managed. Over the past year, ERNA.L returned 4.36% vs 5.17% for ICLU.L. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. ERNA.L charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for ICLU.L.
Performance
ERNA.L vs. ICLU.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ERNA.L achieves a 1.64% return, which is significantly lower than ICLU.L's 2.18% return.
ERNA.L
- 1D
- 0.11%
- 1M
- 0.35%
- YTD
- 1.64%
- 6M
- 1.95%
- 1Y
- 4.36%
- 3Y*
- 5.21%
- 5Y*
- 3.77%
- 10Y*
- —
ICLU.L
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 0.45%
- YTD
- 2.18%
- 6M
- 2.53%
- 1Y
- 5.17%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ERNA.L vs. ICLU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ERNA.L iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 1.64% | 4.08% |
ICLU.L Invesco USD AAA CLO UCITS ETF Acc | 2.18% | 4.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between ERNA.L and ICLU.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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2025 | -0.06 |
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
ERNA.L vs. ICLU.L — Risk / Return Rank
ERNA.L
ICLU.L
ERNA.L vs. ICLU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ERNA.L) and Invesco USD AAA CLO UCITS ETF Acc (ICLU.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.
| ERNA.L | ICLU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.53 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.31 | 2.23 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 21.10 | 8.20 | +12.90 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 82.85 | 38.46 | +44.39 |
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
| ERNA.L | ICLU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.65 | 4.12 | +0.53 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 4.03 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.43 | 3.37 | -1.94 |
Drawdowns
ERNA.L vs. ICLU.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ERNA.L drawdown since its inception was -8.63%, which is greater than ICLU.L's maximum drawdown of -0.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ERNA.L and ICLU.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ERNA.L | ICLU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.63% | -0.91% | -7.72% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.20% | -0.63% | +0.43% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.38% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -0.81% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.10% | -0.08% | -0.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.05% | 0.13% | -0.08% |
Volatility
ERNA.L vs. ICLU.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ERNA.L) has a higher volatility of 0.30% compared to Invesco USD AAA CLO UCITS ETF Acc (ICLU.L) at 0.19%. This indicates that ERNA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ICLU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ERNA.L | ICLU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.30% | 0.19% | +0.11% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.86% | 0.82% | +0.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.93% | 1.26% | -0.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.93% | 1.46% | -0.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.17% | 1.46% | +0.71% |
ERNA.L vs. ICLU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ERNA.L has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than ICLU.L's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
ERNA.L vs. ICLU.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither ERNA.L nor ICLU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
ERNA.L and ICLU.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, ERNA.L is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ERNA.L is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for ICLU.L.
ERNA.L is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while ICLU.L is CLO. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for ERNA.L and 0.25% for ICLU.L.
Find the right allocation for ERNA.L and ICLU.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