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

Performance

ILF vs. IAU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and iShares Gold Trust (IAU). 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 11.49% return, which is significantly higher than IAU's -4.73% return. Over the past 10 years, ILF has underperformed IAU with an annualized return of 8.34%, while IAU has yielded a comparatively higher 11.76% annualized return.


ILF

1D
-1.38%
1M
-2.81%
YTD
11.49%
6M
10.99%
1Y
38.85%
3Y*
12.99%
5Y*
8.24%
10Y*
8.34%

IAU

1D
-1.87%
1M
-8.82%
YTD
-4.73%
6M
-8.68%
1Y
21.45%
3Y*
28.61%
5Y*
18.02%
10Y*
11.76%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ILF vs. IAU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ILF
iShares Latin American 40 ETF
11.49%52.65%-23.11%33.14%9.81%-13.59%-11.71%13.77%-6.85%26.33%
IAU
iShares Gold Trust
-4.73%63.95%26.85%12.84%-0.63%-4.00%25.03%17.98%-1.76%12.91%

Correlation

The correlation between ILF and IAU is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.42

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

0.33

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

0.29

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

0.21

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 28, 2005

0.22

Over the past year, ILF and IAU have become more correlated (0.42) than their long-term average of 0.22, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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. IAU — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILF
ILF Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
ILF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILF Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
ILF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILF Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank

IAU
IAU Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
IAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
IAU Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
IAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
IAU Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
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. IAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and iShares Gold Trust (IAU). 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.


ILFIAUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.97

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.17

+0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.80

0.88

+1.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.13

2.37

+5.76

ILF vs. IAU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILF Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is higher than the IAU Sharpe Ratio of 0.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILF and IAU, 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

ILF vs. IAU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILF drawdown since its inception was -67.48%, which is greater than IAU's maximum drawdown of -45.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILF and IAU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ILFIAUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.48%

-45.14%

-22.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.94%

-24.40%

+10.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.97%

-24.40%

+0.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.71%

-24.40%

-5.31%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-57.79%

-24.40%

-33.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.90%

-23.87%

+12.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-23.91%

-15.97%

-7.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.79%

9.07%

-4.28%

Volatility

ILF vs. IAU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) is 6.53%, while iShares Gold Trust (IAU) has a volatility of 8.10%. This indicates that ILF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ILFIAUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.53%

8.10%

-1.57%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.37%

24.23%

-5.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.26%

27.38%

-5.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.29%

18.18%

+5.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.35%

15.98%

+12.37%

ILF vs. IAU - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILF has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than IAU's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

ILF vs. IAU - Dividend Comparison

ILF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.52%, while IAU has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IAU
iShares Gold Trust
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ILF
iShares Latin American 40 ETF
3.52%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 IAU have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IAU has higher volatility (8.10%) compared to ILF (6.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILF dropped -67.48% vs IAU's -45.14%.

On 10-year performance, IAU leads with 11.76% vs 8.34% for ILF. On fees, IAU is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, ILF has been the lower-risk option at 6.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IAU has performed better with a 11.76% return vs 8.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IAU is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for ILF.

ILF has the higher dividend yield at 3.52%, compared with 0.00% for IAU.

ILF is categorized as Latin America Equities, while IAU is Gold. ILF tracks S&P Latin America 40 Index, while IAU tracks LBMA Gold Price. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for ILF and 0.25% for IAU.

ILF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 0.79), 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 IAU

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