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

Performance

IUMS.L vs. XSPX.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 Xtrackers S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XSPX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IUMS.L is traded in USD, while XSPX.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the XSPX.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 13.48% return, which is significantly higher than XSPX.L's 7.34% return.


IUMS.L

1D
1.14%
1M
2.58%
YTD
13.48%
6M
12.82%
1Y
19.98%
3Y*
10.48%
5Y*
6.32%
10Y*

XSPX.L

1D
-0.85%
1M
-1.99%
YTD
7.34%
6M
7.15%
1Y
21.60%
3Y*
20.68%
5Y*
12.96%
10Y*
15.71%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IUMS.L
iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
13.48%10.92%-0.97%12.43%-11.90%26.93%20.54%22.81%-14.90%18.00%
XSPX.L
Xtrackers S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF 1C
7.34%17.72%25.31%26.30%-18.64%30.09%17.42%31.90%-5.38%16.07%

Correlation

The correlation between IUMS.L and XSPX.L is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.45

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

0.55

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

0.65

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

0.66

Over the past year, the correlation between IUMS.L and XSPX.L has dropped to 0.45 - well below their long-term average of 0.66, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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


Sectors
IUMS.L
XSPX.L

Basic Materials

91.3%
1.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.7%
10.1%

Industrials

1.1%
8.3%

Communication Services

-

11.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.9%

Energy

-

3.5%

Financial Services

-

11.8%

Healthcare

-

8.5%

Real Estate

-

1.9%

Technology

-

35.6%

Utilities

-

2.4%

Basic Materials

IUMS.L
91.3%
XSPX.L
1.8%

Consumer Cyclical

IUMS.L
8.7%
XSPX.L
10.1%

Industrials

IUMS.L
1.1%
XSPX.L
8.3%

Communication Services

IUMS.L

-

XSPX.L
11.2%

Consumer Defensive

IUMS.L

-

XSPX.L
4.9%

Energy

IUMS.L

-

XSPX.L
3.5%

Financial Services

IUMS.L

-

XSPX.L
11.8%

Healthcare

IUMS.L

-

XSPX.L
8.5%

Real Estate

IUMS.L

-

XSPX.L
1.9%

Technology

IUMS.L

-

XSPX.L
35.6%

Utilities

IUMS.L

-

XSPX.L
2.4%

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. XSPX.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: 3535
Overall Rank
IUMS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3232
Omega Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
IUMS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank

XSPX.L
XSPX.L Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
XSPX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XSPX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
XSPX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
XSPX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
XSPX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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. XSPX.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 Xtrackers S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XSPX.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.LXSPX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.33

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.73

2.42

-0.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.99

10.12

-5.13

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

The current IUMS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.17, which is lower than the XSPX.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IUMS.L and XSPX.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. XSPX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IUMS.L drawdown since its inception was -35.83%, smaller than the maximum XSPX.L drawdown of -45.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IUMS.L and XSPX.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IUMS.LXSPX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.83%

-45.87%

+10.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.49%

-8.90%

-2.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.86%

-19.33%

-3.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.24%

-25.11%

-0.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.62%

-3.20%

+0.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.03%

-9.56%

+2.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.99%

2.13%

+1.86%

Volatility

IUMS.L vs. XSPX.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IUMS.L) has a higher volatility of 6.10% compared to Xtrackers S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XSPX.L) at 3.91%. This indicates that IUMS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XSPX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IUMS.LXSPX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.10%

3.91%

+2.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.66%

8.65%

+5.01%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.04%

11.50%

+5.54%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.98%

20.95%

-1.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.05%

18.85%

+1.20%

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

Both IUMS.L and XSPX.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. XSPX.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


IUMS.L and XSPX.L have a correlation of 0.45, 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 XSPX.L have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

IUMS.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Materials Index NTR, while XSPX.L tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IUMS.L and XSPX.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