PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IESG.L vs. FASA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IESG.L vs. FASA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF (IESG.L) and Invesco FTSE All Share Screened & Tilted UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (FASA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IESG.L achieves a 7.43% return, which is significantly higher than FASA.L's 4.29% return.


IESG.L

1D
-0.35%
1M
-1.16%
6M
4.35%
YTD
7.43%
1Y
9.06%
3Y*
7.76%
5Y*
5.24%
10Y*
8.44%

FASA.L

1D
0.23%
1M
0.95%
6M
2.56%
YTD
4.29%
1Y
14.66%
3Y*
12.75%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IESG.L vs. FASA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
IESG.L
iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF
7.43%8.44%0.88%14.27%-9.89%2.42%
FASA.L
Invesco FTSE All Share Screened & Tilted UCITS ETF GBP (Acc)
4.29%21.28%9.36%4.57%-2.43%3.75%

Correlation

The correlation between IESG.L and FASA.L is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.71

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

0.72

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 29, 2021

0.75

The correlation between IESG.L and FASA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.75 - 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

IESG.L vs. FASA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IESG.L
IESG.L Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
IESG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IESG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
IESG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
IESG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
IESG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
Martin Ratio Rank

FASA.L
FASA.L Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
FASA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FASA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
FASA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
FASA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
FASA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
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.

IESG.L vs. FASA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF (IESG.L) and Invesco FTSE All Share Screened & Tilted UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (FASA.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.


IESG.LFASA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.63

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.82

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.24

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.80

1.43

-0.63

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.63

4.47

-1.84

IESG.L vs. FASA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IESG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.70, which is lower than the FASA.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IESG.L and FASA.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

IESG.L vs. FASA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IESG.L drawdown since its inception was -33.61%, which is greater than FASA.L's maximum drawdown of -12.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IESG.L and FASA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IESG.LFASA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.61%

-12.64%

-20.97%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.32%

-10.95%

-0.37%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.07%

-12.35%

-2.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.77%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.33%

-2.45%

+0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.95%

-3.12%

-3.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.44%

3.50%

-0.06%

Volatility

IESG.L vs. FASA.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF (IESG.L) and Invesco FTSE All Share Screened & Tilted UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (FASA.L) have volatilities of 3.49% and 3.42%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IESG.LFASA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.49%

3.42%

+0.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.90%

9.94%

+0.96%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.93%

11.79%

+1.14%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.26%

13.10%

+3.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.78%

13.10%

+2.68%

IESG.L vs. FASA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IESG.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than FASA.L's 0.12% 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

IESG.L vs. FASA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IESG.L nor FASA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


IESG.L and FASA.L have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, FASA.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FASA.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for IESG.L.

IESG.L is categorized as ESG, while FASA.L is Europe Equities. IESG.L tracks MSCI Europe SRI Select Reduced Fossil Fuel Index, while FASA.L tracks FTSE All-Share ex Investment Trusts ESG Climate Select Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for IESG.L and 0.12% for FASA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IESG.L and FASA.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