PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBGL.MI vs. CSH.PA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBGL.MI vs. CSH.PA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in iShares € Govt Bond 15-30yr UCITS ETF EUR Dist (IBGL.MI) and Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc (CSH.PA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBGL.MI achieves a -0.06% return, which is significantly lower than CSH.PA's 0.77% return. Over the past 10 years, IBGL.MI has underperformed CSH.PA with an annualized return of -2.10%, while CSH.PA has yielded a comparatively higher 0.92% annualized return.


IBGL.MI

1D
-0.95%
1M
1.07%
YTD
-0.06%
6M
-0.97%
1Y
-3.37%
3Y*
-0.04%
5Y*
-7.32%
10Y*
-2.10%

CSH.PA

1D
0.01%
1M
0.18%
YTD
0.77%
6M
0.94%
1Y
2.00%
3Y*
2.96%
5Y*
1.89%
10Y*
0.92%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBGL.MI vs. CSH.PA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IBGL.MI
iShares € Govt Bond 15-30yr UCITS ETF EUR Dist
-0.06%-5.53%-0.17%10.21%-34.75%-7.00%11.97%15.43%3.11%-1.15%
CSH.PA
Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc
0.77%2.25%3.69%3.22%-0.06%-0.65%1.93%-0.61%-0.55%-0.45%

Correlation

The correlation between IBGL.MI and CSH.PA is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.01

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

0.00

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

0.01

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

-0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2008

-0.01

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

IBGL.MI vs. CSH.PA — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBGL.MI
IBGL.MI Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
IBGL.MI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBGL.MI Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBGL.MI Omega Ratio Rank: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
IBGL.MI Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBGL.MI Martin Ratio Rank: 44
Martin Ratio Rank

CSH.PA
CSH.PA Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
CSH.PA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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.

IBGL.MI vs. CSH.PA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares € Govt Bond 15-30yr UCITS ETF EUR Dist (IBGL.MI) and Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc (CSH.PA). 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.


IBGL.MICSH.PADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-4.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-7.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.95

1.97

-1.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.54

11.26

-11.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.98

57.42

-58.40

IBGL.MI vs. CSH.PA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBGL.MI Sharpe Ratio is -0.36, which is lower than the CSH.PA Sharpe Ratio of 3.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBGL.MI and CSH.PA, 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


IBGL.MICSH.PADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.36

3.97

-4.33

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.54

5.28

-5.82

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.18

1.41

-1.59

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

0.79

-0.52

Drawdowns

IBGL.MI vs. CSH.PA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBGL.MI drawdown since its inception was -43.83%, which is greater than CSH.PA's maximum drawdown of -3.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBGL.MI and CSH.PA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBGL.MICSH.PADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.83%

-3.73%

-40.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.26%

-0.18%

-6.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.10%

-0.18%

-11.92%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-42.23%

-0.77%

-41.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-43.83%

-2.27%

-41.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-37.45%

0.00%

-37.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.22%

-1.04%

-11.18%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.44%

0.03%

+3.41%

Volatility

IBGL.MI vs. CSH.PA - Volatility Comparison

iShares € Govt Bond 15-30yr UCITS ETF EUR Dist (IBGL.MI) has a higher volatility of 3.70% compared to Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc (CSH.PA) at 0.09%. This indicates that IBGL.MI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSH.PA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBGL.MICSH.PADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.70%

0.09%

+3.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.20%

0.41%

+6.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.28%

0.50%

+8.78%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.56%

0.35%

+13.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.50%

0.64%

+10.86%

IBGL.MI vs. CSH.PA - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBGL.MI has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than CSH.PA's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IBGL.MI vs. CSH.PA - Dividend Comparison

IBGL.MI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.68%, while CSH.PA has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CSH.PA
Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.05%0.05%2.60%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IBGL.MI
iShares € Govt Bond 15-30yr UCITS ETF EUR Dist
3.68%3.53%3.18%2.66%1.32%0.53%0.74%1.27%1.50%1.35%1.48%1.83%

Frequently Asked Questions


IBGL.MI and CSH.PA have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CSH.PA is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CSH.PA is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for IBGL.MI.

IBGL.MI is categorized as European Government Bonds, while CSH.PA is Money Market. IBGL.MI tracks Bloomberg Euro Government Bond 30 Year Term Index, while CSH.PA tracks Solactive Euro Overnight Return Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IBGL.MI and 0.10% for CSH.PA.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IBGL.MI and CSH.PA

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