PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IDFF.L vs. HTWN.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IDFF.L vs. HTWN.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IDFF.L) and HSBC MSCI Taiwan Capped UCITS ETF USD (HTWN.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IDFF.L is traded in USD, while HTWN.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the HTWN.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IDFF.L achieves a 23.86% return, which is significantly lower than HTWN.L's 50.09% return. Over the past 10 years, IDFF.L has underperformed HTWN.L with an annualized return of 9.44%, while HTWN.L has yielded a comparatively higher 19.42% annualized return.


IDFF.L

1D
-2.62%
1M
-10.76%
6M
15.47%
YTD
23.86%
1Y
42.96%
3Y*
23.21%
5Y*
6.60%
10Y*
9.44%

HTWN.L

1D
-3.68%
1M
-9.92%
6M
41.29%
YTD
50.09%
1Y
71.87%
3Y*
38.02%
5Y*
19.14%
10Y*
19.42%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IDFF.L vs. HTWN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IDFF.L
iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
23.86%39.49%12.16%1.47%-21.79%-9.20%25.91%17.27%-15.18%41.70%
HTWN.L
HSBC MSCI Taiwan Capped UCITS ETF USD
50.09%32.44%25.37%28.41%-29.48%28.27%36.16%31.88%-11.06%24.74%

Correlation

The correlation between IDFF.L and HTWN.L is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.82

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

0.75

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

0.75

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

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 30, 2011

0.78

The correlation between IDFF.L and HTWN.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

IDFF.L vs. HTWN.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IDFF.L
IDFF.L Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
IDFF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IDFF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
IDFF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
IDFF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
IDFF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

HTWN.L
HTWN.L Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
HTWN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HTWN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
HTWN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
HTWN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
HTWN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
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.

IDFF.L vs. HTWN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IDFF.L) and HSBC MSCI Taiwan Capped UCITS ETF USD (HTWN.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.


IDFF.LHTWN.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.87

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.95

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.42

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.27

4.82

-1.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.75

16.40

-6.65

IDFF.L vs. HTWN.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IDFF.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is lower than the HTWN.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IDFF.L and HTWN.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

IDFF.L vs. HTWN.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IDFF.L drawdown since its inception was -64.08%, which is greater than HTWN.L's maximum drawdown of -41.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IDFF.L and HTWN.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IDFF.LHTWN.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.08%

-41.10%

-22.98%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.06%

-14.84%

+1.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.77%

-28.02%

+8.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-43.26%

-41.10%

-2.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-50.09%

-41.10%

-8.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-13.06%

-14.84%

+1.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-18.18%

-10.00%

-8.18%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.40%

4.37%

+0.03%

Volatility

IDFF.L vs. HTWN.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IDFF.L) is 10.68%, while HSBC MSCI Taiwan Capped UCITS ETF USD (HTWN.L) has a volatility of 12.14%. This indicates that IDFF.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HTWN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IDFF.LHTWN.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.68%

12.14%

-1.46%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.20%

24.12%

-1.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.91%

27.64%

-2.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.34%

23.53%

-1.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.83%

21.72%

-0.89%

IDFF.L vs. HTWN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IDFF.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than HTWN.L's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

IDFF.L vs. HTWN.L - Dividend Comparison

IDFF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, more than HTWN.L's 0.41% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HTWN.L
HSBC MSCI Taiwan Capped UCITS ETF USD
0.41%1.61%1.17%2.79%3.06%1.11%1.79%0.60%0.00%0.00%2.32%2.59%
IDFF.L
iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
1.13%1.46%1.85%1.85%2.07%1.39%1.13%1.67%2.04%1.50%1.92%2.29%

Frequently Asked Questions


IDFF.L and HTWN.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HTWN.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HTWN.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for IDFF.L.

IDFF.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while HTWN.L is Taiwan Equities. IDFF.L tracks MSCI All Country World Far East Ex Japan USD Index (USD), while HTWN.L tracks MSCI Taiwan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for IDFF.L and 0.50% for HTWN.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IDFF.L and HTWN.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