PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBCI.L vs. IITU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBCI.L vs. IITU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares € Inflation Linked Govt Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (IBCI.L) and iShares S&P 500 Information Technology Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IITU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IBCI.L is traded in GBP, while IITU.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the IITU.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBCI.L achieves a -0.50% return, which is significantly lower than IITU.L's 16.77% return. Over the past 10 years, IBCI.L has underperformed IITU.L with an annualized return of 1.54%, while IITU.L has yielded a comparatively higher 25.26% annualized return.


IBCI.L

1D
-0.23%
1M
-2.45%
6M
-0.49%
YTD
-0.50%
1Y
0.53%
3Y*
1.66%
5Y*
0.22%
10Y*
1.54%

IITU.L

1D
-1.54%
1M
-3.41%
6M
19.28%
YTD
16.77%
1Y
30.62%
3Y*
28.08%
5Y*
21.55%
10Y*
25.26%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBCI.L vs. IITU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IBCI.L
iShares € Inflation Linked Govt Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
-0.50%6.03%-4.55%3.48%-4.33%-0.79%8.45%1.18%-1.05%5.00%
IITU.L
iShares S&P 500 Information Technology Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
16.77%14.44%40.85%50.70%-20.63%35.67%38.34%44.21%4.28%25.57%

Correlation

The correlation between IBCI.L and IITU.L is 0.10, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.10

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

0.03

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

0.06

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.14

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2015

0.14

The correlation between IBCI.L and IITU.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.03 (3 years) to 0.14 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

IBCI.L vs. IITU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBCI.L
IBCI.L Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
IBCI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBCI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBCI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
IBCI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBCI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1111
Martin Ratio Rank

IITU.L
IITU.L Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
IITU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IITU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
IITU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
IITU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
IITU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
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.

IBCI.L vs. IITU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares € Inflation Linked Govt Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (IBCI.L) and iShares S&P 500 Information Technology Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IITU.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.

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.


IBCI.LIITU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.02

1.25

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.13

1.82

-1.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.29

4.40

-4.11

IBCI.L vs. IITU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBCI.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.09, which is lower than the IITU.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBCI.L and IITU.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...

Drawdowns

IBCI.L vs. IITU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBCI.L drawdown since its inception was -30.47%, smaller than the maximum IITU.L drawdown of -41.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBCI.L and IITU.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBCI.LIITU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.47%

-41.09%

+10.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.49%

-16.76%

+13.27%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.28%

-28.03%

+13.75%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.28%

-28.03%

+13.75%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-14.53%

-28.03%

+13.50%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.97%

-8.00%

-0.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.76%

-8.09%

-2.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.53%

6.94%

-5.41%

Volatility

IBCI.L vs. IITU.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares € Inflation Linked Govt Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (IBCI.L) is 1.34%, while iShares S&P 500 Information Technology Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IITU.L) has a volatility of 7.43%. This indicates that IBCI.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IITU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBCI.LIITU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.34%

7.43%

-6.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.71%

16.54%

-12.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.90%

21.54%

-16.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.49%

26.39%

-14.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.76%

23.71%

-11.95%

IBCI.L vs. IITU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBCI.L has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than IITU.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

IBCI.L vs. IITU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IBCI.L nor IITU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


IBCI.L and IITU.L have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

IBCI.L is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for IITU.L.

IBCI.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while IITU.L is Technology Equities. IBCI.L tracks iShares € Inflation Linked Govt Bond UCITS ETF EUR (Acc), while IITU.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Information Technology Index. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for IBCI.L and 0.15% for IITU.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IBCI.L and IITU.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