PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

HSPX.L (HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF) and IUMS.L (iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both S&P 500 funds - HSPX.L tracks the S&P 500 Index while IUMS.L tracks the S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Materials Index NTR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HSPX.L returned 14.91%/yr vs 6.04%/yr for IUMS.L. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HSPX.L charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for IUMS.L.

Performance

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF (HSPX.L) and iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

HSPX.L is traded in GBp, while IUMS.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IUMS.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HSPX.L achieves a 10.50% return, which is significantly lower than IUMS.L's 12.98% return.

HSPX.L

1D
0.01%
1M
5.44%
YTD
10.50%
6M
10.42%
1Y
29.12%
3Y*
19.02%
5Y*
14.91%
10Y*
16.09%

IUMS.L

1D
-0.13%
1M
1.67%
YTD
12.98%
6M
15.93%
1Y
19.40%
3Y*
8.27%
5Y*
6.04%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HSPX.L
HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF		10.50%9.36%27.32%19.94%-9.10%30.95%13.89%26.37%0.09%7.55%
IUMS.L
iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		12.98%3.00%0.81%6.79%-1.42%28.13%17.00%18.25%-10.68%10.12%

Correlation

The correlation between HSPX.L and IUMS.L is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.40

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

0.50

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

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2017

0.67

Over the past year, the correlation between HSPX.L and IUMS.L has dropped to 0.40 - well below their long-term average of 0.67, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
HSPX.L
IUMS.L

Technology

38.0%

-

Financial Services

11.3%

-

Communication Services

10.8%

-

Consumer Cyclical

9.9%
8.5%

Healthcare

8.4%

-

Industrials

7.8%
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.7%

-

Energy

3.4%

-

Utilities

2.2%

-

Real Estate

1.9%

-

Basic Materials

1.7%
91.5%

Technology

HSPX.L
38.0%
IUMS.L

-

Financial Services

HSPX.L
11.3%
IUMS.L

-

Communication Services

HSPX.L
10.8%
IUMS.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

HSPX.L
9.9%
IUMS.L
8.5%

Healthcare

HSPX.L
8.4%
IUMS.L

-

Industrials

HSPX.L
7.8%
IUMS.L
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

HSPX.L
4.7%
IUMS.L

-

Energy

HSPX.L
3.4%
IUMS.L

-

Utilities

HSPX.L
2.2%
IUMS.L

-

Real Estate

HSPX.L
1.9%
IUMS.L

-

Basic Materials

HSPX.L
1.7%
IUMS.L
91.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF

iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

Often compared with HSPX.L:
HSPX.L vs. HSPD.LHSPX.L vs. VOOHSPX.L vs. SPYHSPX.L vs. VUSA.LHSPX.L vs. I500.LHSPX.L vs. SPX5.LHSPX.L vs. VOOG
Often compared with IUMS.L:
IUMS.L vs. MXIIUMS.L vs. IDUS.LIUMS.L vs. IEMA.LIUMS.L vs. DRIVIUMS.L vs. SPED.LIUMS.L vs. CSPX.LIUMS.L vs. DBJP

Return for Risk

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
HSPX.L
HSPX.L Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
HSPX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HSPX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
HSPX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
HSPX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
HSPX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank
IUMS.L
IUMS.L Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
IUMS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
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.

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF (HSPX.L) and iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.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.

HSPX.LIUMS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.72
1.20

+1.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.64
1.71

+1.92

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.51

1.21

+0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.05

1.78

+2.27

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.81

6.15

+8.66

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HSPX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is higher than the IUMS.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HSPX.L and IUMS.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

HSPX.LIUMS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.72

1.20

+1.52

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.05

0.35

+0.70

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.04

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.97

0.45

+0.52

Drawdowns

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HSPX.L drawdown since its inception was -25.43%, smaller than the maximum IUMS.L drawdown of -28.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HSPX.L and IUMS.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HSPX.LIUMS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.43%

-28.94%

+3.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.16%

-10.82%

+3.66%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.76%

-21.83%

+1.07%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.76%

-21.83%

+1.07%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.43%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.24%

-2.96%

+2.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.44%

-5.57%

+2.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.96%

3.15%

-1.19%

Volatility

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF (HSPX.L) is 2.66%, while iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.L) has a volatility of 5.73%. This indicates that HSPX.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IUMS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HSPX.LIUMS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.66%

5.73%

-3.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.23%

13.27%

-6.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.65%

16.08%

-5.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.22%

17.42%

-3.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.47%

19.28%

-3.81%

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HSPX.L has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than IUMS.L's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

HSPX.L vs. IUMS.L - Dividend Comparison

HSPX.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, while IUMS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HSPX.L
HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF		0.82%0.93%0.98%1.19%1.27%0.95%1.41%1.47%1.60%1.54%1.49%1.61%
IUMS.L
iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (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%

Frequently Asked Questions

HSPX.L and IUMS.L have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HSPX.L is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HSPX.L is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for IUMS.L.

HSPX.L tracks S&P 500 Index, while IUMS.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Materials Index NTR. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for HSPX.L and 0.15% for IUMS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HSPX.L and IUMS.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