PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ILF vs. COLO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ILF vs. COLO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and Global X MSCI Colombia ETF (COLO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILF achieves a 11.66% return, which is significantly lower than COLO's 14.14% return. Over the past 10 years, ILF has outperformed COLO with an annualized return of 8.33%, while COLO has yielded a comparatively lower 6.37% annualized return.


ILF

1D
-2.72%
1M
-4.92%
YTD
11.66%
6M
10.51%
1Y
39.82%
3Y*
15.62%
5Y*
8.53%
10Y*
8.33%

COLO

1D
-2.42%
1M
8.62%
YTD
14.14%
6M
13.91%
1Y
48.73%
3Y*
34.47%
5Y*
14.34%
10Y*
6.37%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ILF vs. COLO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ILF
iShares Latin American 40 ETF
11.66%52.65%-23.11%33.14%9.81%-13.59%-11.71%13.77%-6.85%26.33%
COLO
Global X MSCI Colombia ETF
14.14%68.88%4.68%24.92%-21.32%-11.50%-14.60%30.42%-19.88%11.88%

Correlation

The correlation between ILF and COLO is 0.58, 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

0.58

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

0.58

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

0.56

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

0.57

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 10, 2009

0.58

The correlation between ILF and COLO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

ILF vs. COLO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ILF
COLO

Financial Services

34.1%
39.3%

Basic Materials

21.9%
18.4%

Energy

13.4%
17.3%

Industrials

9.2%
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

8.8%

-

Utilities

4.9%
17.7%

Communication Services

4.5%
3.4%

Consumer Cyclical

1.2%
1.5%

Healthcare

1.2%

-

Real Estate

0.7%

-

Technology

-

-

Financial Services

ILF
34.1%
COLO
39.3%

Basic Materials

ILF
21.9%
COLO
18.4%

Energy

ILF
13.4%
COLO
17.3%

Industrials

ILF
9.2%
COLO
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

ILF
8.8%
COLO

-

Utilities

ILF
4.9%
COLO
17.7%

Communication Services

ILF
4.5%
COLO
3.4%

Consumer Cyclical

ILF
1.2%
COLO
1.5%

Healthcare

ILF
1.2%
COLO

-

Real Estate

ILF
0.7%
COLO

-

Technology

ILF

-

COLO

-

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

ILF vs. COLO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILF
ILF Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
ILF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILF Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
ILF Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILF Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

COLO
COLO Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
COLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
COLO Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
COLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
COLO Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
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.

ILF vs. COLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and Global X MSCI Colombia ETF (COLO). 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.


ILFCOLODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.58

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.39

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.16

2.75

+0.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.70

7.53

+2.17

ILF vs. COLO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILF Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is comparable to the COLO Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILF and COLO, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ILFCOLODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.84

2.21

-0.37

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.37

0.62

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

0.25

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.30

0.22

+0.08

Drawdowns

ILF vs. COLO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILF drawdown since its inception was -67.48%, smaller than the maximum COLO drawdown of -78.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILF and COLO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ILFCOLODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.48%

-78.91%

+11.43%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.67%

-17.79%

+5.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.97%

-18.35%

-5.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.71%

-43.86%

+14.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-57.79%

-62.75%

+4.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.76%

-22.51%

+11.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-23.94%

-40.32%

+16.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.12%

6.49%

-2.37%

Volatility

ILF vs. COLO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) is 6.49%, while Global X MSCI Colombia ETF (COLO) has a volatility of 10.70%. This indicates that ILF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COLO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ILFCOLODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.49%

10.70%

-4.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.52%

19.42%

-0.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.76%

22.28%

-0.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.18%

23.21%

-0.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.44%

25.44%

+3.00%

ILF vs. COLO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILF has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than COLO's 0.62% expense ratio.


Dividends

ILF vs. COLO - Dividend Comparison

ILF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.93%, less than COLO's 6.58% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
COLO
Global X MSCI Colombia ETF
6.58%7.51%6.08%6.99%12.55%2.32%3.23%3.04%3.03%1.83%1.48%1.58%
ILF
iShares Latin American 40 ETF
3.93%4.39%7.44%4.61%12.72%8.47%1.88%3.09%3.12%1.80%1.59%3.25%

Frequently Asked Questions


ILF and COLO have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

COLO has higher volatility (10.70%) compared to ILF (6.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILF dropped -67.48% vs COLO's -78.91%.

On 10-year performance, ILF leads with 8.33% vs 6.37% for COLO. On fees, ILF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, ILF has been the lower-risk option at 6.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ILF has performed better with a 8.33% return vs 6.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ILF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.62% for COLO.

COLO has the higher dividend yield at 6.58%, compared with 3.93% for ILF.

ILF tracks S&P Latin America 40 Index, while COLO tracks MSCI All Colombia Select 25/50 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for ILF and 0.62% for COLO.

COLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 1.84), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ILF and COLO

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