PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ICBU.L vs. FLOT.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ICBU.L vs. FLOT.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares USD Intermediate Credit Bond UCITS ETF (ICBU.L) and iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (FLOT.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICBU.L achieves a 0.34% return, which is significantly lower than FLOT.L's 2.38% return.


ICBU.L

1D
0.08%
1M
-0.12%
6M
0.53%
YTD
0.34%
1Y
4.22%
3Y*
5.40%
5Y*
1.61%
10Y*

FLOT.L

1D
0.00%
1M
0.40%
6M
2.18%
YTD
2.38%
1Y
4.77%
3Y*
5.63%
5Y*
4.33%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ICBU.L vs. FLOT.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ICBU.L
iShares USD Intermediate Credit Bond UCITS ETF
0.34%7.68%4.11%6.64%-9.03%-1.29%6.43%10.05%-0.59%1.25%
FLOT.L
iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
2.38%5.19%6.39%6.04%1.87%0.60%0.60%4.19%1.39%0.87%

Correlation

The correlation between ICBU.L and FLOT.L is 0.03, 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

0.03

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

0.02

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

0.01

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2017

0.04

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

ICBU.L vs. FLOT.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICBU.L
ICBU.L Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
ICBU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ICBU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
ICBU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
ICBU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
ICBU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank

FLOT.L
FLOT.L Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
FLOT.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLOT.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLOT.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
FLOT.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLOT.L 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.

ICBU.L vs. FLOT.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares USD Intermediate Credit Bond UCITS ETF (ICBU.L) and iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (FLOT.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.


ICBU.LFLOT.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.64

-0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.89

23.83

-21.94

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.74

44.39

-37.65

ICBU.L vs. FLOT.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICBU.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is lower than the FLOT.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICBU.L and FLOT.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

ICBU.L vs. FLOT.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICBU.L drawdown since its inception was -14.04%, roughly equal to the maximum FLOT.L drawdown of -14.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICBU.L and FLOT.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ICBU.LFLOT.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.04%

-14.03%

-0.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.22%

-0.20%

-2.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.42%

-2.53%

-0.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.04%

-2.53%

-11.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.69%

0.00%

-0.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.75%

-0.22%

-2.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.62%

0.11%

+0.51%

Volatility

ICBU.L vs. FLOT.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares USD Intermediate Credit Bond UCITS ETF (ICBU.L) has a higher volatility of 0.87% compared to iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (FLOT.L) at 0.64%. This indicates that ICBU.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLOT.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ICBU.LFLOT.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.87%

0.64%

+0.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.71%

1.46%

+1.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.36%

1.94%

+1.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.57%

2.90%

+1.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.61%

3.92%

+0.69%

ICBU.L vs. FLOT.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICBU.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than FLOT.L'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

ICBU.L vs. FLOT.L - Dividend Comparison

ICBU.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.72%, more than FLOT.L's 4.68% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLOT.L
iShares $ Floating Rate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
4.68%5.02%6.05%5.50%1.45%0.60%1.59%2.91%2.21%0.46%
ICBU.L
iShares USD Intermediate Credit Bond UCITS ETF
6.72%4.21%3.78%2.78%1.93%1.93%2.78%2.93%2.65%0.44%

Frequently Asked Questions


ICBU.L and FLOT.L have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

FLOT.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for ICBU.L.

ICBU.L is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while FLOT.L is Ultra Short-Term Bonds. ICBU.L tracks Bloomberg US Corp Bond TR USD, while FLOT.L tracks Bloomberg US Floating Rate Note <5 Years Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for ICBU.L and 0.10% for FLOT.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ICBU.L and FLOT.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