PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IFFF.L vs. C500.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IFFF.L vs. C500.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 (IFFF.L) and Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C500.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IFFF.L is traded in GBp, while C500.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the C500.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFFF.L achieves a 26.52% return, which is significantly higher than C500.L's -0.46% return.


IFFF.L

1D
-1.56%
1M
-7.37%
6M
16.48%
YTD
26.52%
1Y
47.83%
3Y*
22.82%
5Y*
7.65%
10Y*
9.54%

C500.L

1D
-1.09%
1M
-0.79%
6M
-1.14%
YTD
-0.46%
1Y
-0.87%
3Y*
2.27%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IFFF.L vs. C500.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
IFFF.L
iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF
26.52%30.77%13.56%-4.04%-1.72%
C500.L
Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc
-0.46%-0.64%14.46%-13.60%13.41%

Correlation

The correlation between IFFF.L and C500.L is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.11

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

0.37

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2022

0.43

The correlation between IFFF.L and C500.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.43 (all time), 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

IFFF.L vs. C500.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IFFF.L
IFFF.L Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
IFFF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank

C500.L

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

IFFF.L vs. C500.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 (IFFF.L) and Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C500.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.


IFFF.LC500.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

0.98

+0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.90

-0.19

+4.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.81

-0.41

+12.22

IFFF.L vs. C500.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IFFF.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is higher than the C500.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFFF.L and C500.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

IFFF.L vs. C500.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFFF.L drawdown since its inception was -72.71%, which is greater than C500.L's maximum drawdown of -38.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFFF.L and C500.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IFFF.LC500.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-72.71%

-38.52%

-34.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.19%

-5.98%

-6.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.69%

-26.03%

+6.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.19%

-14.83%

+2.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-23.53%

-15.85%

-7.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.04%

2.71%

+1.33%

Volatility

IFFF.L vs. C500.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF (IFFF.L) has a higher volatility of 10.82% compared to Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C500.L) at 2.05%. This indicates that IFFF.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than C500.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IFFF.LC500.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.82%

2.05%

+8.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.01%

5.10%

+14.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.63%

6.66%

+15.97%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.89%

22.87%

-2.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.39%

22.87%

-3.48%

IFFF.L vs. C500.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFFF.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than C500.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

IFFF.L vs. C500.L - Dividend Comparison

IFFF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.11%, while C500.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
C500.L
Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IFFF.L
iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF
1.11%1.45%1.80%1.88%2.10%1.36%1.19%1.75%1.98%1.54%1.77%2.22%

Frequently Asked Questions


IFFF.L and C500.L have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, C500.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

C500.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for IFFF.L.

IFFF.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while C500.L is China Equities. IFFF.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while C500.L tracks S&P China A MidCap 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for IFFF.L and 0.35% for C500.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IFFF.L and C500.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