INAA.AS vs. XMJP.L
INAA.AS (iShares MSCI North America UCITS ETF) and XMJP.L (Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - INAA.AS is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 TR USD, while XMJP.L is a Japan Equities fund tracking the TOPIX TR JPY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, INAA.AS returned 14.31%/yr vs 9.39%/yr for XMJP.L. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. INAA.AS charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XMJP.L.
Performance
INAA.AS vs. XMJP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
INAA.AS is traded in EUR, while XMJP.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the XMJP.L values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, INAA.AS achieves a 11.30% return, which is significantly lower than XMJP.L's 17.88% return. Over the past 10 years, INAA.AS has outperformed XMJP.L with an annualized return of 14.31%, while XMJP.L has yielded a comparatively lower 9.39% annualized return.
INAA.AS
- 1D
- -0.35%
- 1M
- 5.90%
- YTD
- 11.30%
- 6M
- 11.28%
- 1Y
- 24.90%
- 3Y*
- 18.79%
- 5Y*
- 13.88%
- 10Y*
- 14.31%
XMJP.L
- 1D
- 0.76%
- 1M
- 7.75%
- YTD
- 17.88%
- 6M
- 18.87%
- 1Y
- 30.32%
- 3Y*
- 15.67%
- 5Y*
- 10.15%
- 10Y*
- 9.39%
INAA.AS vs. XMJP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
INAA.AS iShares MSCI North America UCITS ETF | 11.30% | 4.00% | 32.96% | 20.94% | -14.85% | 37.53% | 9.22% | 32.33% | -1.61% | 6.00% |
XMJP.L Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C | 17.88% | 11.36% | 14.41% | 16.29% | -11.88% | 8.75% | 6.24% | 21.64% | -9.77% | 8.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between INAA.AS and XMJP.L is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 20, 2007 | 0.53 |
The correlation between INAA.AS and XMJP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (1 year) to 0.57 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
INAA.AS vs. XMJP.L — Risk / Return Rank
INAA.AS
XMJP.L
INAA.AS vs. XMJP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI North America UCITS ETF (INAA.AS) and Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C (XMJP.L). 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.
| INAA.AS | XMJP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.54 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.30 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.39 | 2.99 | +0.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.05 | 9.70 | +2.35 |
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
| INAA.AS | XMJP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.17 | 1.63 | +0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 | 0.61 | +0.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.87 | 0.57 | +0.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.63 | 0.32 | +0.30 |
Drawdowns
INAA.AS vs. XMJP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum INAA.AS drawdown since its inception was -51.35%, which is greater than XMJP.L's maximum drawdown of -46.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INAA.AS and XMJP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| INAA.AS | XMJP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.35% | -46.05% | -5.30% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.25% | -10.08% | +2.83% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.43% | -16.85% | -6.58% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.43% | -19.11% | -4.32% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.42% | -28.63% | -5.79% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.35% | 0.00% | -0.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.31% | -11.08% | +2.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.05% | 3.11% | -1.06% |
Volatility
INAA.AS vs. XMJP.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI North America UCITS ETF (INAA.AS) is 2.71%, while Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C (XMJP.L) has a volatility of 3.92%. This indicates that INAA.AS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMJP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| INAA.AS | XMJP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.71% | 3.92% | -1.21% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.44% | 14.89% | -7.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.40% | 18.50% | -7.10% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.31% | 16.70% | -1.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.17% | 16.48% | -0.31% |
INAA.AS vs. XMJP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
INAA.AS has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than XMJP.L's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
INAA.AS vs. XMJP.L - Dividend Comparison
INAA.AS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%, while XMJP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
INAA.AS iShares MSCI North America UCITS ETF | 0.52% | 0.59% | 0.69% | 0.92% | 1.08% | 0.62% | 0.94% | 1.10% | 1.21% | 1.18% | 1.25% | 1.39% |
XMJP.L Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
INAA.AS and XMJP.L have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XMJP.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XMJP.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for INAA.AS.
INAA.AS is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while XMJP.L is Japan Equities. INAA.AS tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while XMJP.L tracks TOPIX TR JPY. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for INAA.AS and 0.20% for XMJP.L.
Find the right allocation for INAA.AS and XMJP.L
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