HLAL vs. UMMA

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

HLAL (Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF) and UMMA (Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HLAL is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the FTSE Shariah USA Index, while UMMA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Wahed. HLAL is passively managed, while UMMA is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, HLAL returned 20.26%/yr vs 24.05%/yr for UMMA. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HLAL charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for UMMA.

Performance

HLAL vs. UMMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF (HLAL) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HLAL achieves a 15.80% return, which is significantly lower than UMMA's 36.44% return.

HLAL

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 0.88%
• YTD: 15.80%
• 6M: 14.98%
• 1Y: 39.01%
• 3Y*: 20.26%
• 5Y*: 15.03%
• 10Y*: —

UMMA

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 10.02%
• YTD: 36.44%
• 6M: 38.86%
• 1Y: 59.49%
• 3Y*: 24.05%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HLAL vs. UMMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
HLAL Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF	15.80%	18.30%	16.70%	30.13%	-16.00%
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF	36.44%	26.65%	4.67%	18.84%	-21.31%

Correlation

The correlation between HLAL and UMMA is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.78
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 7, 2022	0.76

The correlation between HLAL and UMMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

HLAL vs. UMMA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HLAL	UMMA
Technology	51.2%	48.2%
Communication Services	16.8%	1.0%
Healthcare	10.4%	14.8%
Consumer Cyclical	5.6%	7.3%
Industrials	5.2%	12.1%
Energy	4.4%	2.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	5.0%
Basic Materials	2.5%	8.8%
Real Estate	0.8%	0.4%
Utilities	0.2%	-
Financial Services	0.0%	0.0%

Return for Risk

HLAL vs. UMMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

HLAL

HLAL Risk / Return Rank: 84
HLAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
HLAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
HLAL Omega Ratio Rank: 85
HLAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
HLAL Martin Ratio Rank: 84

UMMA

UMMA Risk / Return Rank: 82
UMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
UMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
UMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 83
UMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
UMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

HLAL vs. UMMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF (HLAL) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA). 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.

	HLAL	UMMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.76	2.70	+0.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.75	3.44	+0.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.47	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.84	4.00	-0.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.70	15.38	+1.33

HLAL vs. UMMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HLAL Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is comparable to the UMMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HLAL and UMMA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

HLAL vs. UMMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HLAL drawdown since its inception was -33.57%, roughly equal to the maximum UMMA drawdown of -34.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HLAL and UMMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	HLAL	UMMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.57%	-34.17%	+0.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.20%	-14.93%	+4.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.67%	-18.73%	-2.94%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.18%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.53%	0.00%	-2.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.99%	-9.73%	+4.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.34%	3.88%	-1.54%

Volatility

HLAL vs. UMMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF (HLAL) is 6.21%, while Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA) has a volatility of 10.71%. This indicates that HLAL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UMMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HLAL	UMMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.21%	10.71%	-4.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.36%	19.57%	-8.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.21%	22.16%	-7.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.77%	20.95%	-3.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.25%	20.95%	-0.70%

HLAL vs. UMMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

HLAL has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than UMMA's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

HLAL vs. UMMA - Dividend Comparison

HLAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.46%, less than UMMA's 0.90% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
HLAL Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF	0.46%	0.53%	0.58%	0.72%	1.15%	0.78%	0.97%	0.72%
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF	0.90%	1.02%	0.91%	1.09%	1.77%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HLAL and UMMA in my portfolio?

HLAL and UMMA have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HLAL or UMMA?

UMMA has higher volatility (10.71%) compared to HLAL (6.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HLAL dropped -33.57% vs UMMA's -34.17%.

Which ETF is better, HLAL or UMMA?

On 3-year performance, UMMA leads with 24.05% vs 20.26% for HLAL. On fees, HLAL is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, HLAL has been the lower-risk option at 6.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HLAL or UMMA?

Over the 3-year period, UMMA has performed better with a 24.05% return vs 20.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HLAL or UMMA?

HLAL is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for UMMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HLAL or UMMA?

UMMA has the higher dividend yield at 0.90%, compared with 0.46% for HLAL.

What is the main difference between HLAL and UMMA?

HLAL is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while UMMA is Foreign Large Cap Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for HLAL and 0.65% for UMMA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HLAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.76 vs 2.70), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.