PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ESIE.L vs. INRG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ESIE.L vs. INRG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIE.L) and iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ESIE.L is traded in GBP, while INRG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the INRG.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESIE.L achieves a 35.58% return, which is significantly lower than INRG.L's 41.94% return.


ESIE.L

1D
2.01%
1M
-0.45%
YTD
35.58%
6M
31.87%
1Y
58.97%
3Y*
18.27%
5Y*
20.09%
10Y*

INRG.L

1D
-1.14%
1M
12.78%
YTD
41.94%
6M
40.10%
1Y
86.64%
3Y*
6.52%
5Y*
3.14%
10Y*
13.07%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ESIE.L vs. INRG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
ESIE.L
iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
35.58%20.13%-9.70%6.04%44.68%26.96%1.47%
INRG.L
iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
41.94%34.75%-24.39%-23.83%5.52%-23.71%24.63%

Correlation

The correlation between ESIE.L and INRG.L is -0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.05

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

0.16

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

0.18

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 24, 2020

0.16

The correlation between ESIE.L and INRG.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.18 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ESIE.L vs. INRG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ESIE.L
INRG.L

Energy

99.1%
24.7%

Communication Services

0.9%

-

Basic Materials

-

1.3%

Consumer Cyclical

-

0.1%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

28.3%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

10.5%

Utilities

-

33.7%

Energy

ESIE.L
99.1%
INRG.L
24.7%

Communication Services

ESIE.L
0.9%
INRG.L

-

Basic Materials

ESIE.L

-

INRG.L
1.3%

Consumer Cyclical

ESIE.L

-

INRG.L
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

ESIE.L

-

INRG.L

-

Financial Services

ESIE.L

-

INRG.L

-

Healthcare

ESIE.L

-

INRG.L

-

Industrials

ESIE.L

-

INRG.L
28.3%

Real Estate

ESIE.L

-

INRG.L

-

Technology

ESIE.L

-

INRG.L
10.5%

Utilities

ESIE.L

-

INRG.L
33.7%

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

ESIE.L vs. INRG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESIE.L
ESIE.L Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
ESIE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESIE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESIE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
ESIE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESIE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank

INRG.L
INRG.L Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
INRG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
INRG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
INRG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
INRG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
INRG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

ESIE.L vs. INRG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIE.L) 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.


ESIE.LINRG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.55

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.84

6.96

-2.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.81

20.85

-6.04

ESIE.L vs. INRG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESIE.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is comparable to the INRG.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESIE.L and INRG.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ESIE.LINRG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.56

3.60

-1.04

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

0.13

+0.70

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.87

0.02

+0.85

Drawdowns

ESIE.L vs. INRG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESIE.L drawdown since its inception was -27.35%, smaller than the maximum INRG.L drawdown of -85.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESIE.L and INRG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ESIE.LINRG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.35%

-85.09%

+57.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.13%

-12.38%

+0.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.35%

-44.29%

+16.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.35%

-57.38%

+30.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-65.47%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.04%

-25.86%

+19.82%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.24%

-56.55%

+48.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.97%

4.14%

-0.17%

Volatility

ESIE.L vs. INRG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIE.L) is 8.04%, while iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L) has a volatility of 9.35%. This indicates that ESIE.L 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


ESIE.LINRG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.04%

9.35%

-1.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.14%

17.61%

+1.53%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.89%

23.97%

-1.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.32%

24.78%

-0.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.59%

25.33%

-0.74%

ESIE.L vs. INRG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESIE.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than INRG.L's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

ESIE.L vs. INRG.L - Dividend Comparison

ESIE.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while INRG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.07%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ESIE.L
iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (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


ESIE.L and INRG.L have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ESIE.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ESIE.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for INRG.L.

ESIE.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while INRG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ESIE.L and 0.65% for INRG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ESIE.L 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