PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

FTAL.L vs. EZA

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

FTAL.L (SPDR FTSE UK All Share UCITS ETF) and EZA (iShares MSCI South Africa ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FTAL.L is a Europe Equities fund tracking the FTSE AllSh TR GBP, while EZA is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI South Africa Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FTAL.L returned 9.25%/yr vs 8.68%/yr for EZA. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FTAL.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for EZA.

Performance

FTAL.L vs. EZA - 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 South Africa ETF (EZA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FTAL.L is traded in GBP, while EZA is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EZA 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 EZA's -2.31% return. Over the past 10 years, FTAL.L has outperformed EZA with an annualized return of 9.25%, while EZA has yielded a comparatively lower 8.68% 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%

EZA

1D
0.98%
1M
-4.68%
YTD
-2.31%
6M
2.51%
1Y
32.37%
3Y*
20.97%
5Y*
10.64%
10Y*
8.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FTAL.L vs. EZA - 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%
EZA
iShares MSCI South Africa ETF		-2.31%62.72%9.03%-3.57%6.10%8.93%-7.97%5.65%-20.81%24.26%

Correlation

The correlation between FTAL.L and EZA is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.50

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

0.42

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

0.39

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

0.40

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

0.42

The correlation between FTAL.L and EZA shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (5 years) to 0.50 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FTAL.L vs. EZA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
FTAL.L
EZA

Financial Services

24.2%
32.1%

Industrials

14.5%
1.5%

Healthcare

12.8%
1.2%

Consumer Defensive

12.1%
2.4%

Energy

10.9%

-

Basic Materials

8.4%
39.7%

Consumer Cyclical

5.6%
14.7%

Utilities

5.1%

-

Communication Services

3.0%
6.7%

Real Estate

1.7%
1.6%

Technology

1.7%

-

Financial Services

FTAL.L
24.2%
EZA
32.1%

Industrials

FTAL.L
14.5%
EZA
1.5%

Healthcare

FTAL.L
12.8%
EZA
1.2%

Consumer Defensive

FTAL.L
12.1%
EZA
2.4%

Energy

FTAL.L
10.9%
EZA

-

Basic Materials

FTAL.L
8.4%
EZA
39.7%

Consumer Cyclical

FTAL.L
5.6%
EZA
14.7%

Utilities

FTAL.L
5.1%
EZA

-

Communication Services

FTAL.L
3.0%
EZA
6.7%

Real Estate

FTAL.L
1.7%
EZA
1.6%

Technology

FTAL.L
1.7%
EZA

-

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 South Africa 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 EZA:
EZA vs. AFKEZA vs. KSAEZA vs. SPYEZA vs. PAF.LEZA vs. VTIEZA vs. SCHDEZA vs. INDA

Return for Risk

FTAL.L vs. EZA — 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
EZA
EZA Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
EZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
EZA Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
EZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
EZA Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
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. EZA - 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 South Africa ETF (EZA). 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.LEZADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.85
1.12

+0.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.65
1.59

+1.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.21

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.29

1.44

+0.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.53

3.78

+3.75

FTAL.L vs. EZA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTAL.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.85, which is higher than the EZA Sharpe Ratio of 1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTAL.L and EZA, 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. EZA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTAL.L drawdown since its inception was -35.26%, smaller than the maximum EZA drawdown of -54.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTAL.L and EZA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FTAL.LEZADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.26%

-54.38%

+19.12%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.95%

-22.51%

+13.56%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.17%

-22.51%

+9.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.17%

-28.58%

+15.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.26%

-53.90%

+18.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.68%

-17.58%

+14.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.26%

-14.35%

+10.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.73%

8.59%

-5.86%

Volatility

FTAL.L vs. EZA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR FTSE UK All Share UCITS ETF (FTAL.L) is 3.87%, while iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) has a volatility of 10.43%. This indicates that FTAL.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EZA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

FTAL.LEZADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.87%

10.43%

-6.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.68%

24.70%

-15.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.06%

29.13%

-18.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.74%

25.57%

-12.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.76%

29.10%

-14.34%

FTAL.L vs. EZA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTAL.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than EZA's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

FTAL.L vs. EZA - Dividend Comparison

FTAL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.34%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EZA
iShares MSCI South Africa ETF		6.34%6.16%7.26%2.84%3.90%2.05%5.51%12.27%3.81%1.55%4.10%3.03%
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 EZA have a correlation of 0.50, 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 0.59% for EZA.

FTAL.L is categorized as Europe Equities, while EZA is Emerging Markets Equities. FTAL.L tracks FTSE AllSh TR GBP, while EZA tracks MSCI South Africa Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for FTAL.L and 0.59% for EZA.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FTAL.L and EZA

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