PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ISDU.L vs. CIND.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

ISDU.L (iShares MSCI USA Islamic UCITS ETF) and CIND.L (iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds from iShares - ISDU.L tracks the MSCI USA Islamic Index while CIND.L tracks the Russell 1000 TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ISDU.L returned 12.56%/yr vs 13.49%/yr for CIND.L. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ISDU.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CIND.L.

Performance

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI USA Islamic UCITS ETF (ISDU.L) and iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ISDU.L achieves a 19.91% return, which is significantly higher than CIND.L's 8.78% return. Over the past 10 years, ISDU.L has underperformed CIND.L with an annualized return of 12.56%, while CIND.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.49% annualized return.

ISDU.L

1D
0.86%
1M
0.83%
YTD
19.91%
6M
19.28%
1Y
34.84%
3Y*
18.39%
5Y*
13.46%
10Y*
12.56%

CIND.L

1D
0.20%
1M
3.86%
YTD
8.78%
6M
8.58%
1Y
23.01%
3Y*
17.23%
5Y*
10.14%
10Y*
13.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ISDU.L
iShares MSCI USA Islamic UCITS ETF		19.91%15.85%9.35%25.84%-11.90%29.59%6.85%20.61%-6.03%14.02%
CIND.L
iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc		8.78%14.46%14.71%15.66%-7.56%20.97%8.76%24.22%-4.90%27.62%

Correlation

The correlation between ISDU.L and CIND.L is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.63

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

0.72

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

0.79

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

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2010

0.84

Over the past year, the correlation between ISDU.L and CIND.L has dropped to 0.63 - well below their long-term average of 0.84, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ISDU.L
CIND.L

Technology

53.6%
19.1%

Energy

10.2%
2.2%

Healthcare

9.9%
12.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.9%
11.0%

Industrials

8.0%
18.1%

Basic Materials

4.9%
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

3.5%
4.1%

Utilities

0.5%

-

Communication Services

0.3%
1.8%

Real Estate

0.2%

-

Financial Services

-

27.2%

Technology

ISDU.L
53.6%
CIND.L
19.1%

Energy

ISDU.L
10.2%
CIND.L
2.2%

Healthcare

ISDU.L
9.9%
CIND.L
12.8%

Consumer Cyclical

ISDU.L
8.9%
CIND.L
11.0%

Industrials

ISDU.L
8.0%
CIND.L
18.1%

Basic Materials

ISDU.L
4.9%
CIND.L
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

ISDU.L
3.5%
CIND.L
4.1%

Utilities

ISDU.L
0.5%
CIND.L

-

Communication Services

ISDU.L
0.3%
CIND.L
1.8%

Real Estate

ISDU.L
0.2%
CIND.L

-

Financial Services

ISDU.L

-

CIND.L
27.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares MSCI USA Islamic UCITS ETF

iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc

Often compared with ISDU.L:
ISDU.L vs. ISDW.LISDU.L vs. SPUSISDU.L vs. IGDA.LISDU.L vs. SPWOISDU.L vs. BBUS.LISDU.L vs. BBSU.LISDU.L vs. FLXU.L
Often compared with CIND.L:
CIND.L vs. IYYCIND.L vs. IGSG.LCIND.L vs. DIACIND.L vs. QQQMCIND.L vs. SCHDCIND.L vs. VTCIND.L vs. XLG

Return for Risk

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ISDU.L
ISDU.L Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
ISDU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISDU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISDU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
ISDU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISDU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
CIND.L
CIND.L Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
CIND.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIND.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIND.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
CIND.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIND.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
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.

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Islamic UCITS ETF (ISDU.L) and iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.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.

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.

ISDU.LCIND.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.48
1.87

+0.61

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.40
2.94

+0.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.33

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.03

2.43

+2.60

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.52

8.80

+6.72

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISDU.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.48, which is higher than the CIND.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISDU.L and CIND.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...

Drawdowns

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISDU.L drawdown since its inception was -44.43%, which is greater than CIND.L's maximum drawdown of -36.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISDU.L and CIND.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ISDU.LCIND.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.43%

-36.68%

-7.75%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.89%

-9.44%

+2.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.98%

-16.44%

-5.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.98%

-19.90%

-2.08%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.00%

-36.68%

+3.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.00%

0.00%

-3.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.23%

-3.51%

-2.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.24%

2.61%

-0.37%

Volatility

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI USA Islamic UCITS ETF (ISDU.L) has a higher volatility of 6.20% compared to iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD Acc (CIND.L) at 3.70%. This indicates that ISDU.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CIND.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ISDU.LCIND.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.20%

3.70%

+2.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.29%

9.53%

+1.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.02%

12.28%

+1.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.35%

14.41%

+1.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.24%

15.97%

+0.27%

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ISDU.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CIND.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

ISDU.L vs. CIND.L - Dividend Comparison

ISDU.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, while CIND.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CIND.L
iShares VII plc - iShares Dow Jones Indust Avg ETF USD 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%
ISDU.L
iShares MSCI USA Islamic UCITS ETF		0.63%0.39%0.90%1.10%1.52%1.01%1.39%1.37%1.49%1.38%1.34%1.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

ISDU.L and CIND.L have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ISDU.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ISDU.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CIND.L.

ISDU.L tracks MSCI USA Islamic Index, while CIND.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for ISDU.L and 0.33% for CIND.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ISDU.L and CIND.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