ILF vs. CX
ILF (iShares Latin American 40 ETF) is Latin America Equities fund tracking the S&P Latin America 40 Index, while CX (CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V.) is a stock. Over the past 10 years, ILF returned 8.33%/yr vs 8.18%/yr for CX. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.
Performance
ILF vs. CX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ILF achieves a 11.66% return, which is significantly lower than CX's 12.51% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with ILF having a 8.33% annualized return and CX not far behind at 8.18%.
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%
CX
- 1D
- -1.23%
- 1M
- 8.49%
- YTD
- 12.51%
- 6M
- 19.05%
- 1Y
- 90.98%
- 3Y*
- 27.50%
- 5Y*
- 9.92%
- 10Y*
- 8.18%
ILF vs. CX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
CX CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V. | 12.51% | 105.97% | -26.48% | 91.36% | -40.27% | 31.14% | 36.77% | -19.55% | -35.73% | -2.86% |
Correlation
The correlation between ILF and CX is 0.60, 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 | 0.60 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 29, 2001 | 0.59 |
The correlation between ILF and CX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.60 - 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
ILF vs. CX — Risk / Return Rank
ILF
CX
ILF vs. CX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V. (CX). 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.
| ILF | CX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.77 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.92 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.42 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.16 | 3.81 | -0.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.70 | 13.80 | -4.10 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ILF | CX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.84 | 2.60 | -0.77 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.37 | 0.25 | +0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.29 | 0.19 | +0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.30 | 0.14 | +0.16 |
Drawdowns
ILF vs. CX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ILF drawdown since its inception was -67.48%, smaller than the maximum CX drawdown of -92.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILF and CX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ILF | CX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -67.48% | -92.37% | +24.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.67% | -23.99% | +11.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.97% | -44.38% | +20.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.71% | -63.05% | +33.34% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -57.79% | -83.70% | +25.91% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.76% | -38.17% | +27.41% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.94% | -51.18% | +27.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.12% | 6.62% | -2.50% |
Volatility
ILF vs. CX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) is 6.49%, while CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V. (CX) has a volatility of 13.21%. This indicates that ILF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ILF | CX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.49% | 13.21% | -6.72% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.52% | 28.69% | -10.17% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.76% | 35.12% | -13.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.18% | 39.79% | -16.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.44% | 43.53% | -15.09% |
Dividends
ILF vs. CX - Dividend Comparison
ILF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.93%, more than CX's 0.69% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CX CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V. | 0.69% | 0.76% | 1.10% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 2.64% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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 CX have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CX has higher volatility (13.21%) compared to ILF (6.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILF dropped -67.48% vs CX's -92.37%.
CX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 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.
Find the right allocation for ILF and CX
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