IUSC.DE vs. XMBR.L
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares MSCI EM Latin America UCITS ETF (Dist) (IUSC.DE) and Xtrackers MSCI Brazil UCITS ETF 1C (XMBR.L).
IUSC.DE and XMBR.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IUSC.DE is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets Latin America 10/40. It was launched on Oct 15, 2007. XMBR.L is a passively managed fund by Xtrackers that tracks the performance of the MSCI Brazil NR USD. It was launched on Jun 22, 2007. Both IUSC.DE and XMBR.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: IUSC.DE or XMBR.L.
Correlation
The correlation between IUSC.DE and XMBR.L is 0.86, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
IUSC.DE vs. XMBR.L - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
IUSC.DE:
-0.53
XMBR.L:
-0.77
IUSC.DE:
-0.64
XMBR.L:
-0.98
IUSC.DE:
0.93
XMBR.L:
0.89
IUSC.DE:
-0.35
XMBR.L:
-0.44
IUSC.DE:
-0.72
XMBR.L:
-1.02
IUSC.DE:
12.48%
XMBR.L:
15.00%
IUSC.DE:
17.20%
XMBR.L:
19.92%
IUSC.DE:
-58.97%
XMBR.L:
-72.01%
IUSC.DE:
-16.04%
XMBR.L:
-25.98%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IUSC.DE achieves a 13.15% return, which is significantly higher than XMBR.L's 11.81% return. Over the past 10 years, IUSC.DE has underperformed XMBR.L with an annualized return of 2.17%, while XMBR.L has yielded a comparatively higher 3.86% annualized return.
IUSC.DE
13.15%
9.53%
-3.29%
-10.29%
0.62%
2.17%
XMBR.L
11.81%
7.38%
-9.93%
-15.67%
-2.75%
3.86%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
IUSC.DE vs. XMBR.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IUSC.DE has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than XMBR.L's 0.65% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
IUSC.DE vs. XMBR.L — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank
IUSC.DE
XMBR.L
IUSC.DE vs. XMBR.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM Latin America UCITS ETF (Dist) (IUSC.DE) and Xtrackers MSCI Brazil UCITS ETF 1C (XMBR.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.
Dividends
IUSC.DE vs. XMBR.L - Dividend Comparison
IUSC.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.63%, while XMBR.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IUSC.DE iShares MSCI EM Latin America UCITS ETF (Dist) | 4.63% | 5.24% | 3.98% | 6.78% | 2.68% | 1.65% | 2.07% | 1.88% | 1.41% | 1.22% | 2.65% | 2.32% |
XMBR.L Xtrackers MSCI Brazil UCITS ETF 1C | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
IUSC.DE vs. XMBR.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IUSC.DE drawdown since its inception was -58.97%, smaller than the maximum XMBR.L drawdown of -72.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IUSC.DE and XMBR.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
IUSC.DE vs. XMBR.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI EM Latin America UCITS ETF (Dist) (IUSC.DE) is 3.52%, while Xtrackers MSCI Brazil UCITS ETF 1C (XMBR.L) has a volatility of 4.02%. This indicates that IUSC.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMBR.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.