PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IS15.L vs. EQJS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IS15.L (iShares GBP Corporate Bond 0-5yr UCITS ETF) and EQJS.L (Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - IS15.L is a European Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Markit iBoxx GBP NonGilts 1-5 TR, while EQJS.L is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Next Generation 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IS15.L returned 2.33%/yr vs 8.78%/yr for EQJS.L. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IS15.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for EQJS.L.

Performance

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares GBP Corporate Bond 0-5yr UCITS ETF (IS15.L) and Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc (EQJS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IS15.L is traded in GBP, while EQJS.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the EQJS.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IS15.L achieves a 0.59% return, which is significantly lower than EQJS.L's 23.15% return.

IS15.L

1D
-0.19%
1M
0.56%
YTD
0.59%
6M
1.09%
1Y
4.39%
3Y*
6.08%
5Y*
2.33%
10Y*
2.28%

EQJS.L

1D
0.46%
1M
10.49%
YTD
23.15%
6M
21.43%
1Y
47.47%
3Y*
19.23%
5Y*
8.78%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
IS15.L
iShares GBP Corporate Bond 0-5yr UCITS ETF		0.59%6.24%4.89%7.16%-6.09%-0.18%
EQJS.L
Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc		23.15%12.27%16.78%8.31%-20.39%10.77%

Correlation

The correlation between IS15.L and EQJS.L is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.22

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

0.20

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

0.17

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 29, 2021

0.17

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IS15.L
EQJS.L

Financial Services

28.6%
1.7%

Industrials

25.2%
11.3%

Consumer Cyclical

17.6%
12.7%

Consumer Defensive

8.5%
2.6%

Real Estate

6.0%

-

Technology

5.9%
38.3%

Communication Services

3.9%
7.4%

Basic Materials

2.8%
2.7%

Utilities

1.5%
2.8%

Energy

-

1.2%

Healthcare

-

19.4%

Financial Services

IS15.L
28.6%
EQJS.L
1.7%

Industrials

IS15.L
25.2%
EQJS.L
11.3%

Consumer Cyclical

IS15.L
17.6%
EQJS.L
12.7%

Consumer Defensive

IS15.L
8.5%
EQJS.L
2.6%

Real Estate

IS15.L
6.0%
EQJS.L

-

Technology

IS15.L
5.9%
EQJS.L
38.3%

Communication Services

IS15.L
3.9%
EQJS.L
7.4%

Basic Materials

IS15.L
2.8%
EQJS.L
2.7%

Utilities

IS15.L
1.5%
EQJS.L
2.8%

Energy

IS15.L

-

EQJS.L
1.2%

Healthcare

IS15.L

-

EQJS.L
19.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares GBP Corporate Bond 0-5yr UCITS ETF

Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc

Often compared with IS15.L:
IS15.L vs. ERNS.LIS15.L vs. GHYS.LIS15.L vs. SWDA.LIS15.L vs. IGLS.LIS15.L vs. IEAA.LIS15.L vs. SUSS.LIS15.L vs. JRBE.L
Often compared with EQJS.L:
EQJS.L vs. EQQQ.LEQJS.L vs. QQQEQJS.L vs. VWRA.LEQJS.L vs. QQQMEQJS.L vs. EQGB.LEQJS.L vs. SPXP.LEQJS.L vs. EQQU.L

Return for Risk

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IS15.L
IS15.L Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
IS15.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IS15.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
IS15.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
IS15.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
IS15.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank
EQJS.L
EQJS.L Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
EQJS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQJS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQJS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
EQJS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQJS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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.

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares GBP Corporate Bond 0-5yr UCITS ETF (IS15.L) and Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc (EQJS.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.

IS15.LEQJS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.77
3.05

-1.28

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.57
4.11

-1.54

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.52

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.36

5.05

-2.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.07

17.29

-8.22

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IS15.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.77, which is lower than the EQJS.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IS15.L and EQJS.L, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

IS15.LEQJS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.77

3.05

-1.28

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.70

0.46

+0.24

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.73

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.87

0.46

+0.42

Drawdowns

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IS15.L drawdown since its inception was -12.18%, smaller than the maximum EQJS.L drawdown of -32.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IS15.L and EQJS.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IS15.LEQJS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.18%

-32.10%

+19.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.94%

-9.40%

+7.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.94%

-24.83%

+22.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.18%

-32.10%

+19.92%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-12.18%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.30%

0.00%

-0.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.12%

-13.45%

+12.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.50%

2.75%

-2.25%

Volatility

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares GBP Corporate Bond 0-5yr UCITS ETF (IS15.L) is 1.02%, while Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc (EQJS.L) has a volatility of 5.80%. This indicates that IS15.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EQJS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IS15.LEQJS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.02%

5.80%

-4.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.32%

12.07%

-9.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.58%

15.56%

-12.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.30%

19.05%

-15.75%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.13%

19.22%

-16.09%

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IS15.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than EQJS.L's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IS15.L vs. EQJS.L - Dividend Comparison

IS15.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.54%, while EQJS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EQJS.L
Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IS15.L
iShares GBP Corporate Bond 0-5yr UCITS ETF		4.54%4.35%4.06%3.05%1.80%1.72%1.81%2.03%2.08%2.15%2.55%2.91%

Frequently Asked Questions

IS15.L and EQJS.L have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IS15.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IS15.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for EQJS.L.

IS15.L is categorized as European Corporate Bonds, while EQJS.L is Mid Cap Growth Equities. IS15.L tracks Markit iBoxx GBP NonGilts 1-5 TR, while EQJS.L tracks Nasdaq Next Generation 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for IS15.L and 0.25% for EQJS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IS15.L and EQJS.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