IUMS.L vs. HSPD.L
IUMS.L (iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and HSPD.L (HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF) are both S&P 500 funds - IUMS.L tracks the S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Materials Index NTR while HSPD.L tracks the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IUMS.L returned 4.91%/yr vs 13.69%/yr for HSPD.L. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IUMS.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for HSPD.L.
Performance
IUMS.L vs. HSPD.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IUMS.L achieves a 12.52% return, which is significantly higher than HSPD.L's 10.31% return.
IUMS.L
- 1D
- -0.13%
- 1M
- 0.75%
- YTD
- 12.52%
- 6M
- 16.74%
- 1Y
- 18.25%
- 3Y*
- 11.05%
- 5Y*
- 4.91%
- 10Y*
- —
HSPD.L
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 4.45%
- YTD
- 10.31%
- 6M
- 11.11%
- 1Y
- 27.87%
- 3Y*
- 22.18%
- 5Y*
- 13.69%
- 10Y*
- 15.23%
IUMS.L vs. HSPD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IUMS.L iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 12.52% | 10.90% | -0.92% | 12.41% | -11.90% | 26.93% | 20.54% | 22.92% | -15.68% | 19.22% |
HSPD.L HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF | 10.31% | 17.39% | 25.26% | 26.91% | -18.83% | 29.36% | 17.88% | 30.46% | -5.36% | 16.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between IUMS.L and HSPD.L is 0.53, 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 | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2017 | 0.73 |
Over the past year, the correlation between IUMS.L and HSPD.L has dropped to 0.53 - well below their long-term average of 0.73, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
IUMS.L vs. HSPD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IUMS.L
HSPD.L
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
IUMS.L
HSPD.L
Consumer Cyclical
IUMS.L
HSPD.L
Industrials
IUMS.L
HSPD.L
Communication Services
IUMS.L
-
HSPD.L
Consumer Defensive
IUMS.L
-
HSPD.L
Energy
IUMS.L
-
HSPD.L
Financial Services
IUMS.L
-
HSPD.L
Healthcare
IUMS.L
-
HSPD.L
Real Estate
IUMS.L
-
HSPD.L
Technology
IUMS.L
-
HSPD.L
Utilities
IUMS.L
-
HSPD.L
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
IUMS.L vs. HSPD.L — Risk / Return Rank
IUMS.L
HSPD.L
IUMS.L vs. HSPD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.L) and HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF (HSPD.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.
| IUMS.L | HSPD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.29 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.85 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | 1.44 | -0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.58 | 3.37 | -1.79 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.71 | 14.45 | -9.74 |
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
| IUMS.L | HSPD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.10 | 2.39 | -1.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.26 | 0.86 | -0.60 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.94 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.48 | 0.96 | -0.48 |
Drawdowns
IUMS.L vs. HSPD.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IUMS.L drawdown since its inception was -35.81%, which is greater than HSPD.L's maximum drawdown of -34.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IUMS.L and HSPD.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IUMS.L | HSPD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.81% | -34.00% | -1.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.51% | -8.24% | -3.27% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.80% | -18.39% | -4.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.24% | -24.59% | -0.65% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.00% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.42% | -0.52% | -2.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.06% | -3.76% | -3.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.87% | 1.92% | +1.95% |
Volatility
IUMS.L vs. HSPD.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.L) has a higher volatility of 6.12% compared to HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF (HSPD.L) at 3.23%. This indicates that IUMS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HSPD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IUMS.L | HSPD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.12% | 3.23% | +2.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.40% | 8.47% | +4.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.52% | 11.59% | +4.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.90% | 15.91% | +2.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.07% | 16.23% | +3.84% |
IUMS.L vs. HSPD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IUMS.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than HSPD.L's 0.09% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
IUMS.L vs. HSPD.L - Dividend Comparison
IUMS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HSPD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.83%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HSPD.L HSBC S&P 500 UCITS ETF | 0.83% | 0.90% | 1.00% | 1.18% | 1.34% | 0.98% | 1.32% | 1.41% | 1.68% | 1.44% | 1.65% | 1.67% |
IUMS.L iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS 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% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IUMS.L and HSPD.L have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HSPD.L is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HSPD.L is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for IUMS.L.
IUMS.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Materials Index NTR, while HSPD.L tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IUMS.L and 0.09% for HSPD.L.
Find the right allocation for IUMS.L and HSPD.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