IUMS.L vs. S5SD.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IUMS.L (iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and S5SD.L (UBS ETF (IE) S&P 500 ESG UCITS ETF USD A-dis) are both S&P 500 funds - IUMS.L tracks the S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Materials Index NTR while S5SD.L tracks the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IUMS.L returned 18.25% vs 28.81% for S5SD.L. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IUMS.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for S5SD.L.

Performance

IUMS.L vs. S5SD.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 UBS ETF (IE) S&P 500 ESG UCITS ETF USD A-dis (S5SD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

IUMS.L is traded in USD, while S5SD.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the S5SD.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 12.52% return, which is significantly higher than S5SD.L's 8.70% 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*: —

S5SD.L

• 1D: -0.80%
• 1M: 4.09%
• YTD: 8.70%
• 6M: 10.26%
• 1Y: 28.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IUMS.L vs. S5SD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IUMS.L iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	12.52%	12.11%
S5SD.L UBS ETF (IE) S&P 500 ESG UCITS ETF USD A-dis	8.70%	28.19%

Correlation

The correlation between IUMS.L and S5SD.L is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 29, 2025	0.46

IUMS.L vs. S5SD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IUMS.L	S5SD.L
Basic Materials	91.5%	1.9%
Consumer Cyclical	8.5%	4.6%
Industrials	1.1%	6.8%
Communication Services	-	14.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.1%
Energy	-	4.2%
Financial Services	-	12.0%
Healthcare	-	9.3%
Real Estate	-	2.2%
Technology	-	38.6%
Utilities	-	0.8%

Return for Risk

IUMS.L vs. S5SD.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: 31
IUMS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
IUMS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
IUMS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 29
IUMS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
IUMS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 32

S5SD.L

S5SD.L Risk / Return Rank: 85
S5SD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
S5SD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
S5SD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 88
S5SD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
S5SD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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. S5SD.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 UBS ETF (IE) S&P 500 ESG UCITS ETF USD A-dis (S5SD.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	S5SD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.10	2.65	-1.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.63	3.86	-2.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.47	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.58	3.07	-1.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.71	13.34	-8.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IUMS.L vs. S5SD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IUMS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is lower than the S5SD.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IUMS.L and S5SD.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IUMS.L	S5SD.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.10	2.65	-1.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.26	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.48	3.04	-2.57

Drawdowns

IUMS.L vs. S5SD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IUMS.L drawdown since its inception was -35.81%, which is greater than S5SD.L's maximum drawdown of -9.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IUMS.L and S5SD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	IUMS.L	S5SD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.81%	-9.53%	-26.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.51%	-9.53%	-1.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.80%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.42%	-0.80%	-2.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.06%	-1.16%	-5.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.87%	2.20%	+1.67%

Volatility

IUMS.L vs. S5SD.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.L) has a higher volatility of 6.12% compared to UBS ETF (IE) S&P 500 ESG UCITS ETF USD A-dis (S5SD.L) at 2.88%. This indicates that IUMS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than S5SD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IUMS.L	S5SD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.12%	2.88%	+3.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.40%	8.01%	+5.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.52%	11.10%	+5.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.90%	11.60%	+7.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.07%	11.60%	+8.47%

IUMS.L vs. S5SD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IUMS.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than S5SD.L's 0.12% 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. S5SD.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IUMS.L nor S5SD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IUMS.L and S5SD.L in my portfolio?

IUMS.L and S5SD.L have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IUMS.L or S5SD.L?

On fees, S5SD.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IUMS.L or S5SD.L?

S5SD.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for IUMS.L.

What is the main difference between IUMS.L and S5SD.L?

IUMS.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Materials Index NTR, while S5SD.L tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IUMS.L and 0.12% for S5SD.L.