METI.L vs. AAPL

Last updated Jun 27, 2026

METI.L (IncomeShares META Options ETP GBP) is Derivative Income fund actively managed by Leverage Shares, while AAPL (Apple Inc) is a stock. Over the past year, METI.L returned -33.00% vs 47.44% for AAPL. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

METI.L vs. AAPL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in IncomeShares META Options ETP GBP (METI.L) and Apple Inc (AAPL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, METI.L achieves a -27.60% return, which is significantly lower than AAPL's 6.76% return.

METI.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -9.59%
• YTD: -27.60%
• 6M: -26.84%
• 1Y: -33.00%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AAPL

• 1D: 3.13%
• 1M: -7.12%
• YTD: 6.76%
• 6M: 6.36%
• 1Y: 47.44%
• 3Y*: 13.91%
• 5Y*: 18.13%
• 10Y*: 29.70%

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

METI.L vs. AAPL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
METI.L IncomeShares META Options ETP GBP	-27.60%	-0.90%	3.56%
AAPL Apple Inc	6.76%	1.28%	15.01%

Correlation

The correlation between METI.L and AAPL is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2024	0.12

Return for Risk

METI.L vs. AAPL — Risk / Return Rank

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

METI.L

METI.L Risk / Return Rank: 4
METI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
METI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
METI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3
METI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
METI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5

AAPL

AAPL Risk / Return Rank: 85
AAPL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
AAPL Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
AAPL Omega Ratio Rank: 85
AAPL Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
AAPL Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

METI.L vs. AAPL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IncomeShares META Options ETP GBP (METI.L) and Apple Inc (AAPL). 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.

	METI.L	AAPL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.64	2.01	-2.65
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.80	2.70	-3.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	1.37	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.63	2.97	-3.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.95	7.23	-8.18

METI.L vs. AAPL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current METI.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.64, which is lower than the AAPL Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of METI.L and AAPL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

METI.L vs. AAPL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum METI.L drawdown since its inception was -52.73%, which is greater than AAPL's maximum drawdown of -49.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for METI.L and AAPL.

Drawdown Indicators

	METI.L	AAPL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.73%	-49.37%	-3.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-52.73%	-16.06%	-36.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-34.64%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.64%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-52.73%	-8.13%	-44.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.63%	-10.30%	-12.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	34.71%	6.58%	+28.13%

Volatility

METI.L vs. AAPL - Volatility Comparison

IncomeShares META Options ETP GBP (METI.L) has a higher volatility of 10.42% compared to Apple Inc (AAPL) at 9.80%. This indicates that METI.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AAPL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	METI.L	AAPL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.42%	9.80%	+0.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.77%	18.18%	+6.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	51.42%	23.74%	+27.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	44.17%	26.72%	+17.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	44.17%	28.94%	+15.23%

Dividends

METI.L vs. AAPL - Dividend Comparison

METI.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 21.32%, more than AAPL's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AAPL Apple Inc	0.37%	0.38%	0.40%	0.49%	0.70%	0.49%	0.61%	1.04%	1.79%	1.45%	1.93%	1.93%
METI.L IncomeShares META Options ETP GBP	21.32%	20.59%	3.05%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both METI.L and AAPL in my portfolio?

METI.L and AAPL have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.