IBTA.L vs. ISAC.L
IBTA.L (iShares USD Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF (Acc)) and ISAC.L (iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - IBTA.L is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE US Treasury 1-3 Year Index, while ISAC.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IBTA.L returned 1.87%/yr vs 11.38%/yr for ISAC.L. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. IBTA.L charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ISAC.L.
Performance
IBTA.L vs. ISAC.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBTA.L achieves a 0.46% return, which is significantly lower than ISAC.L's 11.54% return.
IBTA.L
- 1D
- 0.13%
- 1M
- 0.13%
- YTD
- 0.46%
- 6M
- 0.92%
- 1Y
- 3.43%
- 3Y*
- 4.23%
- 5Y*
- 1.87%
- 10Y*
- —
ISAC.L
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 4.26%
- YTD
- 11.54%
- 6M
- 13.01%
- 1Y
- 28.81%
- 3Y*
- 21.19%
- 5Y*
- 11.38%
- 10Y*
- 12.63%
IBTA.L vs. ISAC.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBTA.L iShares USD Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF (Acc) | 0.46% | 5.30% | 4.11% | 4.15% | -3.75% | -0.64% | 3.14% | 3.58% | 1.44% | -0.05% |
ISAC.L iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 11.54% | 22.36% | 17.81% | 22.57% | -18.16% | 18.85% | 15.66% | 25.77% | -9.73% | 17.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBTA.L and ISAC.L is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 18, 2017 | -0.02 |
The correlation between IBTA.L and ISAC.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (all time) to 0.22 (1 year), 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
IBTA.L vs. ISAC.L — Risk / Return Rank
IBTA.L
ISAC.L
IBTA.L vs. ISAC.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares USD Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF (Acc) (IBTA.L) and iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ISAC.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.
| IBTA.L | ISAC.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.59 | 1.43 | +0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.62 | 3.27 | +1.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.47 | 13.72 | +3.75 |
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
| IBTA.L | ISAC.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.80 | 2.31 | +0.49 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.93 | 0.73 | +0.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.79 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.08 | 0.75 | +0.33 |
Drawdowns
IBTA.L vs. ISAC.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBTA.L drawdown since its inception was -5.80%, smaller than the maximum ISAC.L drawdown of -33.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBTA.L and ISAC.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBTA.L | ISAC.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.80% | -33.82% | +28.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.74% | -8.77% | +8.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.89% | -16.56% | +15.67% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -5.70% | -26.07% | +20.37% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.82% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.13% | -0.72% | +0.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.97% | -4.69% | +3.72% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.20% | 2.10% | -1.90% |
Volatility
IBTA.L vs. ISAC.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares USD Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF (Acc) (IBTA.L) is 0.43%, while iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ISAC.L) has a volatility of 3.84%. This indicates that IBTA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISAC.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBTA.L | ISAC.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.43% | 3.84% | -3.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.86% | 9.77% | -8.91% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.23% | 12.40% | -11.17% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.00% | 15.57% | -13.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.76% | 15.95% | -14.19% |
IBTA.L vs. ISAC.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBTA.L has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than ISAC.L's 0.20% 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
IBTA.L vs. ISAC.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither IBTA.L nor ISAC.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
IBTA.L and ISAC.L have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IBTA.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IBTA.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for ISAC.L.
IBTA.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while ISAC.L is Global Equities. IBTA.L tracks ICE US Treasury 1-3 Year Index, while ISAC.L tracks MSCI ACWI Index. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IBTA.L and 0.20% for ISAC.L.
Find the right allocation for IBTA.L and ISAC.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