ILF vs. FAX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ILF (iShares Latin American 40 ETF) and FAX (abrdn Asia-Pacific Income Fund Inc) are both funds - ILF is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the S&P Latin America 40 Index, while FAX is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund managed by Aberdeen. Over the past 10 years, ILF returned 8.33%/yr vs 2.90%/yr for FAX. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ILF charges 0.48%/yr vs 3.33%/yr for FAX.

Performance

ILF vs. FAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and abrdn Asia-Pacific Income Fund Inc (FAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILF achieves a 11.66% return, which is significantly higher than FAX's -0.83% return. Over the past 10 years, ILF has outperformed FAX with an annualized return of 8.33%, while FAX has yielded a comparatively lower 2.90% 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%

FAX

• 1D: -1.57%
• 1M: -2.13%
• YTD: -0.83%
• 6M: 0.63%
• 1Y: 4.31%
• 3Y*: 9.41%
• 5Y*: -0.03%
• 10Y*: 2.90%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ILF vs. FAX - 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%
FAX abrdn Asia-Pacific Income Fund Inc	-0.83%	18.23%	2.31%	16.53%	-22.83%	-7.20%	14.08%	19.48%	-12.72%	14.65%

Correlation

The correlation between ILF and FAX is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.27
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 29, 2001	0.29

Return for Risk

ILF vs. FAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILF

ILF Risk / Return Rank: 54
ILF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
ILF Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
ILF Omega Ratio Rank: 49
ILF Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
ILF Martin Ratio Rank: 55

FAX

FAX Risk / Return Rank: 5
FAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
FAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FAX Omega Ratio Rank: 5
FAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
FAX Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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. FAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and abrdn Asia-Pacific Income Fund Inc (FAX). 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	FAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	0.35	+1.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.44	0.56	+1.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.07	+0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.16	0.39	+2.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.70	0.88	+8.82
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ILF vs. FAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILF Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is higher than the FAX Sharpe Ratio of 0.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILF and FAX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ILF	FAX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.84	0.35	+1.49
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	-0.00	+0.37
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.29	0.18	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.17	+0.13

Drawdowns

ILF vs. FAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILF drawdown since its inception was -67.48%, which is greater than FAX's maximum drawdown of -63.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILF and FAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	ILF	FAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.48%	-63.96%	-3.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.67%	-11.14%	-1.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.97%	-13.17%	-10.80%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.71%	-40.49%	+10.78%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-57.79%	-40.57%	-17.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.76%	-7.99%	-2.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.94%	-17.85%	-6.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.12%	4.88%	-0.76%

Volatility

ILF vs. FAX - Volatility Comparison

iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) has a higher volatility of 6.49% compared to abrdn Asia-Pacific Income Fund Inc (FAX) at 5.36%. This indicates that ILF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ILF	FAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.49%	5.36%	+1.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.52%	10.00%	+8.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.76%	12.35%	+9.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.18%	15.94%	+7.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.44%	16.51%	+11.93%

ILF vs. FAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILF has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than FAX's 3.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

ILF vs. FAX - Dividend Comparison

ILF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.93%, less than FAX's 13.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FAX abrdn Asia-Pacific Income Fund Inc	13.74%	12.91%	13.45%	12.18%	12.55%	8.64%	7.42%	8.29%	10.85%	8.61%	9.07%	9.19%
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

Can I hold both ILF and FAX in my portfolio?

ILF and FAX have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ILF or FAX?

ILF has higher volatility (6.49%) compared to FAX (5.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILF dropped -67.48% vs FAX's -63.96%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 0.35), 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.