PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IUMS.L vs. IESU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IUMS.L vs. IESU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.L) and iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IESU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IUMS.L achieves a 10.83% return, which is significantly lower than IESU.L's 28.54% return.


IUMS.L

1D
0.00%
1M
-4.17%
6M
4.36%
YTD
10.83%
1Y
14.66%
3Y*
7.91%
5Y*
6.05%
10Y*

IESU.L

1D
0.85%
1M
6.06%
6M
21.20%
YTD
28.54%
1Y
36.33%
3Y*
14.63%
5Y*
22.27%
10Y*
8.78%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IUMS.L vs. IESU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IUMS.L
iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
10.83%10.92%-0.97%12.43%-11.90%26.93%20.54%22.81%-14.90%18.00%
IESU.L
iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
28.54%9.98%3.69%-1.00%63.91%52.43%-33.64%9.60%-18.29%7.48%

Correlation

The correlation between IUMS.L and IESU.L is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.02

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

0.21

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

0.37

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2017

0.46

The correlation between IUMS.L and IESU.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (1 year) to 0.46 (all time), 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

IUMS.L vs. IESU.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IUMS.L
IUMS.L Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
IUMS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank

IESU.L
IESU.L Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
IESU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IESU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
IESU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
IESU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
IESU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
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.

IUMS.L vs. IESU.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 iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IESU.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.


IUMS.LIESU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.26

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.27

2.21

-0.94

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.56

5.65

-2.08

IUMS.L vs. IESU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IUMS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.85, which is lower than the IESU.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IUMS.L and IESU.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

IUMS.L vs. IESU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IUMS.L drawdown since its inception was -35.83%, smaller than the maximum IESU.L drawdown of -72.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IUMS.L and IESU.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IUMS.LIESU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.83%

-72.57%

+36.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.49%

-16.37%

+4.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.86%

-22.55%

-0.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.24%

-27.74%

+2.50%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-66.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.90%

-8.87%

+3.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.01%

-24.88%

+17.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.11%

6.42%

-2.31%

Volatility

IUMS.L vs. IESU.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.L) is 5.30%, while iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IESU.L) has a volatility of 6.97%. This indicates that IUMS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IESU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IUMS.LIESU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.30%

6.97%

-1.67%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.00%

21.03%

-7.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.25%

23.89%

-6.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.00%

29.47%

-10.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.05%

29.81%

-9.76%

IUMS.L vs. IESU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IUMS.L and IESU.L have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IUMS.L vs. IESU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IUMS.L nor IESU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


IUMS.L and IESU.L have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IUMS.L and IESU.L have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

IUMS.L is categorized as S&P 500, while IESU.L is Energy Equities. IUMS.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Materials Index NTR, while IESU.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Energy Index NTR.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IUMS.L and IESU.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