PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

MIBX.L (Lyxor FTSE MIB UCITS ETF - Dist) and CMB1.L (iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both Europe Equities funds tracking the FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR, from Amundi and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MIBX.L returned 17.49%/yr vs 17.45%/yr for CMB1.L. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MIBX.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CMB1.L.

Performance

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Lyxor FTSE MIB UCITS ETF - Dist (MIBX.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MIBX.L having a 17.04% return and CMB1.L slightly lower at 16.99%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with MIBX.L having a 17.49% annualized return and CMB1.L not far behind at 17.45%.

MIBX.L

1D
0.07%
1M
3.30%
YTD
17.04%
6M
17.60%
1Y
38.44%
3Y*
29.72%
5Y*
20.55%
10Y*
17.49%

CMB1.L

1D
0.03%
1M
3.29%
YTD
16.99%
6M
17.62%
1Y
38.46%
3Y*
29.77%
5Y*
20.58%
10Y*
17.45%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MIBX.L
Lyxor FTSE MIB UCITS ETF - Dist		17.04%43.78%13.17%30.61%-3.53%18.16%1.49%25.15%-12.72%21.14%
CMB1.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)		16.99%43.83%13.25%30.68%-3.56%18.29%1.52%24.83%-13.79%22.48%

Correlation

The correlation between MIBX.L and CMB1.L is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

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

0.99

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

1.00

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

0.99

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.97

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2010

0.93

The correlation between MIBX.L and CMB1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
MIBX.L
CMB1.L

Financial Services

45.3%
47.2%

Utilities

15.9%
15.3%

Industrials

11.4%
11.1%

Consumer Cyclical

9.9%
9.2%

Energy

7.9%
7.2%

Technology

5.5%
6.0%

Communication Services

1.7%
1.8%

Healthcare

1.2%
1.1%

Basic Materials

0.5%
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

0.4%
0.4%

Real Estate

0.3%
0.3%

Financial Services

MIBX.L
45.3%
CMB1.L
47.2%

Utilities

MIBX.L
15.9%
CMB1.L
15.3%

Industrials

MIBX.L
11.4%
CMB1.L
11.1%

Consumer Cyclical

MIBX.L
9.9%
CMB1.L
9.2%

Energy

MIBX.L
7.9%
CMB1.L
7.2%

Technology

MIBX.L
5.5%
CMB1.L
6.0%

Communication Services

MIBX.L
1.7%
CMB1.L
1.8%

Healthcare

MIBX.L
1.2%
CMB1.L
1.1%

Basic Materials

MIBX.L
0.5%
CMB1.L
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

MIBX.L
0.4%
CMB1.L
0.4%

Real Estate

MIBX.L
0.3%
CMB1.L
0.3%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Lyxor FTSE MIB UCITS ETF - Dist

iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)

Often compared with MIBX.L:
MIBX.L vs. PRY.MIMIBX.L vs. DAXMIBX.L vs. VUSA.LMIBX.L vs. SPYMIBX.L vs. FLXD.LMIBX.L vs. 500G.LMIBX.L vs. BNKE.L
Often compared with CMB1.L:
CMB1.L vs. XDEM.LCMB1.L vs. H50E.LCMB1.L vs. IITU.LCMB1.L vs. SPYCMB1.L vs. IQSA.LCMB1.L vs. X7PP.LCMB1.L vs. EQQQ.L

Return for Risk

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MIBX.L
MIBX.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
MIBX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MIBX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
MIBX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
MIBX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
MIBX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank
CMB1.L
CMB1.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
CMB1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor FTSE MIB UCITS ETF - Dist (MIBX.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.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.

MIBX.LCMB1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.54
2.54

-0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.41
3.42

-0.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.44

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.73

3.71

+0.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.56

13.55

+0.01

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MIBX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.54, which is comparable to the CMB1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MIBX.L and CMB1.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

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MIBX.L drawdown since its inception was -67.93%, which is greater than CMB1.L's maximum drawdown of -56.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MIBX.L and CMB1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MIBX.LCMB1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.93%

-56.05%

-11.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.26%

-10.32%

+0.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.64%

-15.62%

-0.02%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.06%

-24.19%

+0.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.10%

-36.61%

+1.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.69%

-2.84%

+0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-39.84%

-15.20%

-24.64%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.83%

2.83%

0.00%

Volatility

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor FTSE MIB UCITS ETF - Dist (MIBX.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L) have volatilities of 3.85% and 3.96%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MIBX.LCMB1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.85%

3.96%

-0.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.39%

12.40%

-0.01%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.10%

15.07%

+0.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.95%

18.01%

-0.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.93%

20.12%

-1.19%

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MIBX.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than CMB1.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

MIBX.L vs. CMB1.L - Dividend Comparison

MIBX.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.15%, while CMB1.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CMB1.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MIBX.L
Lyxor FTSE MIB UCITS ETF - Dist		3.15%3.68%3.93%3.73%3.88%2.09%1.55%4.02%4.05%2.75%3.56%3.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.99, MIBX.L and CMB1.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, CMB1.L is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CMB1.L is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for MIBX.L.

Both ETFs track FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MIBX.L and 0.33% for CMB1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MIBX.L and CMB1.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