PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L

Last updated Jul 22, 2026
Documentation

ISFD.L (iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Acc)) and IMIB.L (iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist)) are both Europe Equities funds from iShares - ISFD.L tracks the FTSE 100 Index while IMIB.L tracks the FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ISFD.L returned 13.12%/yr vs 20.55%/yr for IMIB.L. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ISFD.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for IMIB.L.

Performance

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Acc) (ISFD.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist) (IMIB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ISFD.L is traded in USD, while IMIB.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the IMIB.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ISFD.L achieves a 8.60% return, which is significantly lower than IMIB.L's 16.52% return.

ISFD.L

1D
0.69%
1M
2.51%
6M
6.34%
YTD
8.60%
1Y
20.92%
3Y*
15.50%
5Y*
13.12%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
8.55%

IMIB.L

1D
0.71%
1M
-1.42%
6M
16.71%
YTD
16.52%
1Y
32.10%
3Y*
28.67%
5Y*
20.55%
10Y*
15.85%
ALL TIME*
3.48%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ISFD.L
iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Acc)		8.60%25.94%9.52%8.45%5.93%17.43%-11.32%19.80%-6.68%2.38%
IMIB.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist)		16.52%54.63%11.28%37.43%-13.90%17.23%4.56%29.86%-20.11%-1.62%

Correlation

The correlation between ISFD.L and IMIB.L is 0.58, 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

0.58

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

0.56

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

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 19, 2017

0.60

The correlation between ISFD.L and IMIB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ISFD.L
IMIB.L

Financial Services

26.0%
48.0%

Consumer Defensive

14.3%
0.4%

Industrials

13.8%
10.0%

Healthcare

13.7%
1.1%

Energy

9.9%
7.1%

Basic Materials

8.0%
0.5%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
9.5%

Utilities

4.9%
15.6%

Communication Services

2.3%
1.8%

Real Estate

1.0%
0.3%

Technology

0.9%
5.4%

Financial Services

ISFD.L
26.0%
IMIB.L
48.0%

Consumer Defensive

ISFD.L
14.3%
IMIB.L
0.4%

Industrials

ISFD.L
13.8%
IMIB.L
10.0%

Healthcare

ISFD.L
13.7%
IMIB.L
1.1%

Energy

ISFD.L
9.9%
IMIB.L
7.1%

Basic Materials

ISFD.L
8.0%
IMIB.L
0.5%

Consumer Cyclical

ISFD.L
5.1%
IMIB.L
9.5%

Utilities

ISFD.L
4.9%
IMIB.L
15.6%

Communication Services

ISFD.L
2.3%
IMIB.L
1.8%

Real Estate

ISFD.L
1.0%
IMIB.L
0.3%

Technology

ISFD.L
0.9%
IMIB.L
5.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Acc)

iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist)

Often compared with ISFD.L:
ISFD.L vs. IITU.LISFD.L vs. CNDX.LISFD.L vs. ISAC.LISFD.L vs. IWDA.LISFD.L vs. LGUS.LISFD.L vs. SWDA.LISFD.L vs. CSP1.L
Often compared with IMIB.L:
IMIB.L vs. ESIF.LIMIB.L vs. SPMOIMIB.L vs. X7PP.LIMIB.L vs. VOOIMIB.L vs. BNKE.LIMIB.L vs. PSRE.LIMIB.L vs. EEIP.L

Return for Risk

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ISFD.L
ISFD.L Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
ISFD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISFD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISFD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
ISFD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISFD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank
IMIB.L
IMIB.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
IMIB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMIB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMIB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
IMIB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMIB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Acc) (ISFD.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist) (IMIB.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.

ISFD.LIMIB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.86
1.87

-0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.61
2.61

0.00

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.33

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.35

2.85

-0.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.41

9.92

-2.51

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISFD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the IMIB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISFD.L and IMIB.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

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISFD.L drawdown since its inception was -33.97%, smaller than the maximum IMIB.L drawdown of -77.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISFD.L and IMIB.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ISFD.LIMIB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.97%

-77.82%

+43.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.85%

-11.22%

+2.37%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.64%

-17.45%

+4.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.64%

-35.64%

+23.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-43.41%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.63%

-1.56%

-0.07%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.60%

-49.21%

+44.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.82%

3.23%

-0.41%

Volatility

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF USD Hedged (Acc) (ISFD.L) is 2.92%, while iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist) (IMIB.L) has a volatility of 4.21%. This indicates that ISFD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IMIB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ISFD.LIMIB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.92%

4.21%

-1.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.67%

14.30%

-4.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.23%

17.14%

-5.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.72%

21.06%

-8.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.61%

21.37%

-5.76%

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ISFD.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than IMIB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

ISFD.L vs. IMIB.L - Dividend Comparison

ISFD.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IMIB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.74%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IMIB.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF EUR (Dist)		3.74%3.83%4.53%3.77%3.90%3.15%1.44%3.41%0.00%0.61%2.82%2.15%
ISFD.L
iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF USD Hedged (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%

Frequently Asked Questions

ISFD.L and IMIB.L have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

ISFD.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for IMIB.L.

ISFD.L tracks FTSE 100 Index, while IMIB.L tracks FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ISFD.L and 0.35% for IMIB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ISFD.L and IMIB.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