ILF vs. OTGL
ILF (iShares Latin American 40 ETF) and OTGL (OTG Latin America ETF) are both Latin America Equities funds - ILF tracks the S&P Latin America 40 (Net) while OTGL tracks the Actively Managed. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ILF returned 38.91% vs 21.65% for OTGL. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ILF charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for OTGL.
Performance
ILF vs. OTGL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ILF achieves a 13.45% return, which is significantly higher than OTGL's 7.05% return.
ILF
- 1D
- -1.16%
- 1M
- -0.87%
- 6M
- 8.22%
- YTD
- 13.45%
- 1Y
- 38.91%
- 3Y*
- 13.39%
- 5Y*
- 9.60%
- 10Y*
- 7.29%
OTGL
- 1D
- -0.78%
- 1M
- -1.03%
- 6M
- 2.20%
- YTD
- 7.05%
- 1Y
- 21.65%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ILF vs. OTGL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ILF iShares Latin American 40 ETF | 13.45% | 22.44% |
OTGL OTG Latin America ETF | 7.05% | 13.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between ILF and OTGL is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2025 | 0.90 |
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. OTGL — Risk / Return Rank
ILF
OTGL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ILF vs. OTGL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and OTG Latin America ETF (OTGL). 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.
| ILF | OTGL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.80 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.65 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ILF vs. OTGL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ILF drawdown since its inception was -67.48%, which is greater than OTGL's maximum drawdown of -13.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILF and OTGL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ILF | OTGL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -67.48% | -13.52% | -53.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.94% | -13.52% | -0.42% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.97% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.71% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -57.79% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.33% | -7.75% | -1.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.88% | -3.60% | -20.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.10% | — | — |
Volatility
ILF vs. OTGL - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ILF | OTGL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.84% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.41% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.22% | 18.97% | +3.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.19% | 18.97% | +4.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.25% | 18.97% | +9.28% |
ILF vs. OTGL - Expense Ratio Comparison
ILF has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than OTGL's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
ILF vs. OTGL - Dividend Comparison
ILF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.46%, more than OTGL's 2.78% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ILF iShares Latin American 40 ETF | 3.46% | 4.39% | 7.44% | 4.61% | 12.72% | 8.47% | 1.88% | 3.09% | 3.12% | 1.80% | 1.59% | 3.25% |
OTGL OTG Latin America ETF | 2.78% | 1.89% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ILF and OTGL have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On 1-year performance, ILF leads with 38.91% vs 21.65% for OTGL. On fees, ILF is cheaper at 0.47% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ILF has performed better with a 38.91% return vs 21.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ILF is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for OTGL.
ILF has the higher dividend yield at 3.46%, compared with 2.78% for OTGL.
ILF tracks S&P Latin America 40 (Net), while OTGL tracks Actively Managed. They also come from different issuers: iShares and OTG. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for ILF and 0.95% for OTGL.
Find the right allocation for ILF and OTGL
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