IBC3.DE vs. EIMI.L
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS ETF (IBC3.DE) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L).
IBC3.DE and EIMI.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IBC3.DE is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market (IMI). It was launched on Mar 5, 2018. EIMI.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index. It was launched on May 30, 2014. Both IBC3.DE and EIMI.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: IBC3.DE or EIMI.L.
Key characteristics
| IBC3.DE | EIMI.L | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 13.67% | 8.46% |
| 1Y Return | 17.04% | 13.79% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 0.47% | -2.30% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 4.98% | 3.89% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.29 | 0.82 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.82 | 1.27 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.24 | 1.15 |
| Calmar Ratio | 1.04 | 0.48 |
| Martin Ratio | 6.56 | 4.29 |
| Ulcer Index | 2.61% | 2.85% |
| Daily Std Dev | 13.36% | 15.14% |
| Max Drawdown | -31.89% | -38.73% |
| Current Drawdown | -4.64% | -14.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBC3.DE and EIMI.L is 0.94, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
IBC3.DE vs. EIMI.L - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, IBC3.DE achieves a 13.67% return, which is significantly higher than EIMI.L's 8.46% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
IBC3.DE vs. EIMI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both IBC3.DE and EIMI.L have an expense ratio of 0.18%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
IBC3.DE vs. EIMI.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS ETF (IBC3.DE) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.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.
Dividends
IBC3.DE vs. EIMI.L - Dividend Comparison
IBC3.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, while EIMI.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBC3.DE iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS ETF | 2.45% | 2.69% | 3.36% | 2.18% | 2.09% | 2.56% | 2.08% |
EIMI.L iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
IBC3.DE vs. EIMI.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBC3.DE drawdown since its inception was -31.89%, smaller than the maximum EIMI.L drawdown of -38.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBC3.DE and EIMI.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
IBC3.DE vs. EIMI.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS ETF (IBC3.DE) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) have volatilities of 5.10% and 4.93%, 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.