FLOA.L vs. ERNA.L
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares USD Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (FLOA.L) and iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ERNA.L).
FLOA.L and ERNA.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FLOA.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg US Corp Bond TR USD. It was launched on Mar 20, 2018. ERNA.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg US Corp 1-3 Yr TR USD. It was launched on Jun 29, 2018. Both FLOA.L and ERNA.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: FLOA.L or ERNA.L.
Key characteristics
| FLOA.L | ERNA.L | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 2.74% | 2.12% |
| 1Y Return | 7.00% | 5.89% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 3.57% | 3.01% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 2.76% | 2.42% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 8.35 | 9.09 |
| Daily Std Dev | 0.85% | 0.65% |
| Max Drawdown | -14.96% | -8.63% |
| Current Drawdown | -0.02% | 0.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLOA.L and ERNA.L is 0.13, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Performance
FLOA.L vs. ERNA.L - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, FLOA.L achieves a 2.74% return, which is significantly higher than ERNA.L's 2.12% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FLOA.L vs. ERNA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLOA.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is higher than ERNA.L's 0.09% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
FLOA.L vs. ERNA.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares USD Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (FLOA.L) and iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ERNA.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.
Dividends
FLOA.L vs. ERNA.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither FLOA.L nor ERNA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
FLOA.L vs. ERNA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLOA.L drawdown since its inception was -14.96%, which is greater than ERNA.L's maximum drawdown of -8.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLOA.L and ERNA.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
FLOA.L vs. ERNA.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares USD Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (FLOA.L) has a higher volatility of 0.23% compared to iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ERNA.L) at 0.14%. This indicates that FLOA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ERNA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.