ILF vs. WGMI

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

ILF (iShares Latin American 40 ETF) and WGMI (Valkyrie Bitcoin Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ILF is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the S&P Latin America 40 Index, while WGMI is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Valkyrie. ILF is passively managed, while WGMI is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ILF returned 12.20%/yr vs 86.64%/yr for WGMI. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ILF charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for WGMI.

Performance

ILF vs. WGMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and Valkyrie Bitcoin Miners ETF (WGMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILF achieves a 7.68% return, which is significantly lower than WGMI's 71.81% return.

ILF

• 1D: -1.06%
• 1M: -9.99%
• YTD: 7.68%
• 6M: 9.39%
• 1Y: 34.22%
• 3Y*: 12.20%
• 5Y*: 7.92%
• 10Y*: 8.00%

WGMI

• 1D: 6.75%
• 1M: 13.32%
• YTD: 71.81%
• 6M: 41.61%
• 1Y: 235.97%
• 3Y*: 86.64%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ILF vs. WGMI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
ILF iShares Latin American 40 ETF	7.68%	52.65%	-23.11%	33.14%	-0.61%
WGMI Valkyrie Bitcoin Miners ETF	71.81%	72.47%	23.54%	304.08%	-83.48%

Correlation

The correlation between ILF and WGMI is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.37
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 9, 2022	0.36

ILF vs. WGMI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ILF	WGMI
Financial Services	34.1%	51.3%
Basic Materials	21.9%	-
Energy	13.4%	-
Industrials	9.2%	0.5%
Consumer Defensive	8.8%	-
Utilities	4.9%	1.2%
Communication Services	4.5%	1.2%
Consumer Cyclical	1.2%	-
Healthcare	1.2%	-
Real Estate	0.7%	-
Technology	-	45.9%

Return for Risk

ILF vs. WGMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILF

ILF Risk / Return Rank: 50
ILF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
ILF Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
ILF Omega Ratio Rank: 47
ILF Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
ILF Martin Ratio Rank: 51

WGMI

WGMI Risk / Return Rank: 77
WGMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
WGMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
WGMI Omega Ratio Rank: 70
WGMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
WGMI Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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. WGMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) and Valkyrie Bitcoin Miners ETF (WGMI). 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	WGMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	3.11	-1.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.13	3.09	-0.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.37	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.47	4.66	-2.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.90	9.45	-1.54
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. WGMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILF Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is lower than the WGMI Sharpe Ratio of 3.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILF and WGMI, 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	WGMI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.57	3.11	-1.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.28	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.28	+0.01

Drawdowns

ILF vs. WGMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILF drawdown since its inception was -67.48%, smaller than the maximum WGMI drawdown of -85.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILF and WGMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	ILF	WGMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.48%	-85.76%	+18.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.94%	-50.94%	+37.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.97%	-62.79%	+38.82%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.71%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-57.79%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.94%	-8.05%	-5.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.93%	-42.81%	+18.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.34%	25.10%	-20.76%

Volatility

ILF vs. WGMI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Latin American 40 ETF (ILF) is 6.03%, while Valkyrie Bitcoin Miners ETF (WGMI) has a volatility of 20.94%. This indicates that ILF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WGMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ILF	WGMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.03%	20.94%	-14.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.64%	56.53%	-37.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.99%	76.50%	-54.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.20%	81.67%	-58.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.43%	81.67%	-53.24%

ILF vs. WGMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILF has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than WGMI's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

ILF vs. WGMI - Dividend Comparison

ILF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.08%, while WGMI has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ILF iShares Latin American 40 ETF	4.08%	4.39%	7.44%	4.61%	12.72%	8.47%	1.88%	3.09%	3.12%	1.80%	1.59%	3.25%
WGMI Valkyrie Bitcoin Miners ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.22%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ILF and WGMI in my portfolio?

ILF and WGMI have a correlation of 0.40, 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 WGMI?

WGMI has higher volatility (20.94%) compared to ILF (6.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILF dropped -67.48% vs WGMI's -85.76%.

Which ETF is better, ILF or WGMI?

On 3-year performance, WGMI leads with 86.64% vs 12.20% for ILF. On fees, ILF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, ILF has been the lower-risk option at 6.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ILF or WGMI?

Over the 3-year period, WGMI has performed better with a 86.64% return vs 12.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ILF or WGMI?

ILF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for WGMI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ILF or WGMI?

ILF has the higher dividend yield at 4.08%, compared with 0.00% for WGMI.

What is the main difference between ILF and WGMI?

ILF is categorized as Latin America Equities, while WGMI is Cryptocurrency. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Valkyrie. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for ILF and 0.75% for WGMI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WGMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.11 vs 1.57), 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.