PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
FTAL.L vs. EWM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

FTAL.L vs. EWM

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

FTAL.L (SPDR FTSE UK All Share UCITS ETF) and EWM (iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FTAL.L is a Europe Equities fund tracking the FTSE AllSh TR GBP, while EWM is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Malaysia Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FTAL.L returned 9.25%/yr vs 3.32%/yr for EWM. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FTAL.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EWM.

Performance

FTAL.L vs. EWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR FTSE UK All Share UCITS ETF (FTAL.L) and iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF (EWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FTAL.L is traded in GBP, while EWM is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EWM values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FTAL.L achieves a 7.14% return, which is significantly higher than EWM's 3.41% return. Over the past 10 years, FTAL.L has outperformed EWM with an annualized return of 9.25%, while EWM has yielded a comparatively lower 3.32% annualized return.

FTAL.L

1D
1.76%
1M
1.53%
YTD
7.14%
6M
10.13%
1Y
21.14%
3Y*
14.47%
5Y*
10.33%
10Y*
9.25%

EWM

1D
0.34%
1M
-6.84%
YTD
3.41%
6M
5.74%
1Y
21.91%
3Y*
12.65%
5Y*
5.78%
10Y*
3.32%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FTAL.L vs. EWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FTAL.L
SPDR FTSE UK All Share UCITS ETF		7.14%23.19%9.03%7.92%0.55%17.18%-9.96%19.28%-9.70%12.98%
EWM
iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF		3.41%7.49%21.55%-8.43%5.17%-6.53%0.09%-5.16%-0.73%13.50%

Correlation

The correlation between FTAL.L and EWM is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.33

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

0.24

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

0.20

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2012

0.33

The correlation between FTAL.L and EWM shifts across timeframes, from 0.20 (5 years) to 0.33 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FTAL.L vs. EWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
FTAL.L
EWM

Financial Services

24.2%
46.6%

Industrials

14.5%
11.1%

Healthcare

12.8%
3.8%

Consumer Defensive

12.1%
7.3%

Energy

10.9%
3.9%

Basic Materials

8.4%
8.9%

Consumer Cyclical

5.6%
1.1%

Utilities

5.1%
10.8%

Communication Services

3.0%
6.6%

Real Estate

1.7%

-

Technology

1.7%

-

Financial Services

FTAL.L
24.2%
EWM
46.6%

Industrials

FTAL.L
14.5%
EWM
11.1%

Healthcare

FTAL.L
12.8%
EWM
3.8%

Consumer Defensive

FTAL.L
12.1%
EWM
7.3%

Energy

FTAL.L
10.9%
EWM
3.9%

Basic Materials

FTAL.L
8.4%
EWM
8.9%

Consumer Cyclical

FTAL.L
5.6%
EWM
1.1%

Utilities

FTAL.L
5.1%
EWM
10.8%

Communication Services

FTAL.L
3.0%
EWM
6.6%

Real Estate

FTAL.L
1.7%
EWM

-

Technology

FTAL.L
1.7%
EWM

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

SPDR FTSE UK All Share UCITS ETF

iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF

Often compared with FTAL.L:
FTAL.L vs. CUKX.LFTAL.L vs. VUKG.LFTAL.L vs. EUEA.ASFTAL.L vs. NG.LFTAL.L vs. REL.LFTAL.L vs. LWDB.LFTAL.L vs. GBPG.L
Often compared with EWM:
EWM vs. EIDOEWM vs. EWYEWM vs. EWTEWM vs. EPIEWM vs. AAXJEWM vs. VOOEWM vs. SCHD

Return for Risk

FTAL.L vs. EWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
FTAL.L
FTAL.L Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
FTAL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTAL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTAL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
FTAL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTAL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank
EWM
EWM Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
EWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWM Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
EWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWM Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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.

FTAL.L vs. EWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR FTSE UK All Share UCITS ETF (FTAL.L) and iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF (EWM). 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.

FTAL.LEWMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.85
1.65

+0.20

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.65
2.25

+0.39

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.28

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.29

2.53

-0.24

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.53

8.34

-0.81

FTAL.L vs. EWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTAL.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.85, which is comparable to the EWM Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTAL.L and EWM, 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

FTAL.L vs. EWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTAL.L drawdown since its inception was -35.26%, smaller than the maximum EWM drawdown of -41.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTAL.L and EWM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FTAL.LEWMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.26%

-41.57%

+6.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.95%

-8.31%

-0.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.17%

-17.43%

+4.26%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.17%

-19.50%

+6.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.26%

-33.70%

-1.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.68%

-6.84%

+4.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.26%

-12.92%

+8.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.73%

2.52%

+0.21%

Volatility

FTAL.L vs. EWM - Volatility Comparison

SPDR FTSE UK All Share UCITS ETF (FTAL.L) and iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF (EWM) have volatilities of 3.87% and 3.79%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

FTAL.LEWMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.87%

3.79%

+0.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.68%

9.76%

-0.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.06%

12.71%

-1.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.74%

12.80%

-0.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.76%

16.10%

-1.34%

FTAL.L vs. EWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTAL.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than EWM's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

FTAL.L vs. EWM - Dividend Comparison

FTAL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.32%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EWM
iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF		3.32%3.41%3.32%3.47%3.00%6.48%1.89%2.91%3.84%5.58%5.97%37.54%
FTAL.L
SPDR FTSE UK All Share UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

FTAL.L and EWM have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, FTAL.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FTAL.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EWM.

FTAL.L is categorized as Europe Equities, while EWM is Asia Pacific Equities. FTAL.L tracks FTSE AllSh TR GBP, while EWM tracks MSCI Malaysia Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for FTAL.L and 0.49% for EWM.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FTAL.L and EWM

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