IASH.L vs. IWDA.L
IASH.L (iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD) and IWDA.L (iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - IASH.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while IWDA.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IASH.L returned 7.12%/yr vs 14.05%/yr for IWDA.L. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IASH.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for IWDA.L.
Performance
IASH.L vs. IWDA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
IASH.L is traded in GBp, while IWDA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IWDA.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IASH.L achieves a 9.51% return, which is significantly lower than IWDA.L's 10.12% return. Over the past 10 years, IASH.L has underperformed IWDA.L with an annualized return of 7.12%, while IWDA.L has yielded a comparatively higher 14.05% annualized return.
IASH.L
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 3.10%
- YTD
- 9.51%
- 6M
- 12.93%
- 1Y
- 38.65%
- 3Y*
- 8.41%
- 5Y*
- 0.05%
- 10Y*
- 7.12%
IWDA.L
- 1D
- -0.27%
- 1M
- 4.87%
- YTD
- 10.12%
- 6M
- 10.50%
- 1Y
- 27.28%
- 3Y*
- 17.82%
- 5Y*
- 13.03%
- 10Y*
- 14.05%
IASH.L vs. IWDA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IASH.L iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD | 9.51% | 17.67% | 12.92% | -18.83% | -17.27% | 4.48% | 37.65% | 29.94% | -21.35% | 17.95% |
IWDA.L iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 10.12% | 12.41% | 21.19% | 18.05% | -8.38% | 23.34% | 12.65% | 22.29% | -3.62% | 12.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between IASH.L and IWDA.L is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2015 | 0.31 |
The correlation between IASH.L and IWDA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (3 years) to 0.31 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
IASH.L vs. IWDA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
Energy
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Financial Services
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Industrials
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Basic Materials
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Consumer Defensive
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Consumer Cyclical
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Healthcare
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Utilities
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Energy
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Communication Services
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Real Estate
IASH.L
IWDA.L
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
IASH.L vs. IWDA.L — Risk / Return Rank
IASH.L
IWDA.L
IASH.L vs. IWDA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD (IASH.L) and iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.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.
| IASH.L | IWDA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.06 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.44 | 1.44 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.73 | 4.26 | +1.46 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.80 | 16.05 | -0.25 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IASH.L | IWDA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.47 | 2.34 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.00 | 0.90 | -0.90 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 | 0.90 | -0.57 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.09 | 0.86 | -0.77 |
Drawdowns
IASH.L vs. IWDA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IASH.L drawdown since its inception was -48.39%, which is greater than IWDA.L's maximum drawdown of -26.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IASH.L and IWDA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IASH.L | IWDA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.39% | -26.18% | -22.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.72% | -6.37% | -0.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.77% | -18.91% | -6.86% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.23% | -18.91% | -23.32% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -44.67% | -26.18% | -18.49% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.06% | -0.27% | -9.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.72% | -3.39% | -21.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.44% | 1.70% | +0.74% |
Volatility
IASH.L vs. IWDA.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD (IASH.L) has a higher volatility of 5.69% compared to iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.L) at 3.47%. This indicates that IASH.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWDA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IASH.L | IWDA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.69% | 3.47% | +2.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.68% | 8.85% | +1.83% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.61% | 11.65% | +3.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.27% | 14.49% | +6.78% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.79% | 15.51% | +7.28% |
IASH.L vs. IWDA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IASH.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than IWDA.L's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
IASH.L vs. IWDA.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither IASH.L nor IWDA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
IASH.L and IWDA.L have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IWDA.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IWDA.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for IASH.L.
IASH.L is categorized as China Equities, while IWDA.L is Global Equities. IASH.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while IWDA.L tracks MSCI World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for IASH.L and 0.20% for IWDA.L.
Find the right allocation for IASH.L and IWDA.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