IBC4.DE vs. AXQT.DE
IBC4.DE (iShares MSCI South Africa UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and AXQT.DE (AXA IM MSCI Emerging Markets ex-China Equity PAB UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - IBC4.DE tracks the MSCI South Africa Capped Index while AXQT.DE tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Climate Paris Aligned. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBC4.DE returned 32.92% vs 60.34% for AXQT.DE. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBC4.DE charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for AXQT.DE.
Performance
IBC4.DE vs. AXQT.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBC4.DE achieves a -1.83% return, which is significantly lower than AXQT.DE's 39.53% return.
IBC4.DE
- 1D
- 0.65%
- 1M
- -0.00%
- 6M
- -2.26%
- YTD
- -1.83%
- 1Y
- 32.92%
- 3Y*
- 22.90%
- 5Y*
- 11.49%
- 10Y*
- 7.19%
AXQT.DE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -1.89%
- 6M
- 37.17%
- YTD
- 39.53%
- 1Y
- 60.34%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBC4.DE vs. AXQT.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IBC4.DE iShares MSCI South Africa UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | -1.83% | 43.91% |
AXQT.DE AXA IM MSCI Emerging Markets ex-China Equity PAB UCITS ETF USD Acc | 39.53% | 24.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBC4.DE and AXQT.DE is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2025 | 0.48 |
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
IBC4.DE vs. AXQT.DE — Risk / Return Rank
IBC4.DE
AXQT.DE
IBC4.DE vs. AXQT.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI South Africa UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IBC4.DE) and AXA IM MSCI Emerging Markets ex-China Equity PAB UCITS ETF USD Acc (AXQT.DE). 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.
| IBC4.DE | AXQT.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.77 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.96 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.50 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.52 | 5.28 | -3.75 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.57 | 17.84 | -14.27 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IBC4.DE vs. AXQT.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBC4.DE drawdown since its inception was -55.48%, which is greater than AXQT.DE's maximum drawdown of -12.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBC4.DE and AXQT.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBC4.DE | AXQT.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.48% | -12.88% | -42.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.54% | -11.49% | -10.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.54% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.74% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -55.48% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.46% | -7.30% | -9.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.44% | -2.17% | -15.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.21% | 3.40% | +5.81% |
Volatility
IBC4.DE vs. AXQT.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI South Africa UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IBC4.DE) is 8.06%, while AXA IM MSCI Emerging Markets ex-China Equity PAB UCITS ETF USD Acc (AXQT.DE) has a volatility of 9.65%. This indicates that IBC4.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AXQT.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBC4.DE | AXQT.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.06% | 9.65% | -1.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 25.34% | 18.59% | +6.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 29.76% | 21.11% | +8.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.63% | 21.60% | +4.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.84% | 21.60% | +6.24% |
IBC4.DE vs. AXQT.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBC4.DE has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than AXQT.DE's 0.27% expense ratio.
Dividends
IBC4.DE vs. AXQT.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither IBC4.DE nor AXQT.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
IBC4.DE and AXQT.DE have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, AXQT.DE is cheaper at 0.27% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AXQT.DE is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for IBC4.DE.
IBC4.DE tracks MSCI South Africa Capped Index, while AXQT.DE tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Climate Paris Aligned. They also come from different issuers: iShares and AXA IM. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for IBC4.DE and 0.27% for AXQT.DE.
Find the right allocation for IBC4.DE and AXQT.DE
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