PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RR.L vs. CEA1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RR.L vs. CEA1.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RR.L (Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC) is a stock, while CEA1.L (iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc)) is Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. Over the past 10 years, RR.L returned 21.22%/yr vs 12.09%/yr for CEA1.L. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

RR.L vs. CEA1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC (RR.L) and iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RR.L achieves a 10.33% return, which is significantly lower than CEA1.L's 30.56% return. Over the past 10 years, RR.L has outperformed CEA1.L with an annualized return of 21.22%, while CEA1.L has yielded a comparatively lower 12.09% annualized return.

RR.L

1D
0.40%
1M
5.09%
YTD
10.33%
6M
16.29%
1Y
42.96%
3Y*
105.84%
5Y*
64.29%
10Y*
21.22%

CEA1.L

1D
-1.69%
1M
8.28%
YTD
30.56%
6M
33.05%
1Y
59.80%
3Y*
23.16%
5Y*
9.12%
10Y*
12.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RR.L vs. CEA1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RR.L
Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC		10.33%104.79%89.72%221.57%-24.15%10.45%-52.55%-15.32%0.80%32.64%
CEA1.L
iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc)		30.56%25.23%13.67%0.79%-11.96%-4.22%23.90%13.81%-10.88%29.65%

Correlation

The correlation between RR.L and CEA1.L is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.27

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

0.25

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

0.26

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

0.30

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 3, 2013

0.32

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC

iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc)

Often compared with RR.L:
RR.L vs. RYCEYRR.L vs. RNMBYRR.L vs. COST.LRR.L vs. LUG.TORR.L vs. AVIO.MIRR.L vs. SAABYRR.L vs. BTC-USD
Often compared with CEA1.L:
CEA1.L vs. ADIVCEA1.L vs. EMV.LCEA1.L vs. XCX5.LCEA1.L vs. EMIM.LCEA1.L vs. IPACCEA1.L vs. IWDA.LCEA1.L vs. SPY

Return for Risk

RR.L vs. CEA1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
RR.L
RR.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
RR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
RR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
RR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
RR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
CEA1.L
CEA1.L Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
CEA1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEA1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEA1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
CEA1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEA1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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.

RR.L vs. CEA1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC (RR.L) and iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.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.

RR.LCEA1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.19
3.23

-2.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.86
4.12

-2.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.58

-0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.25

5.09

-2.85

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.29

17.73

-11.44

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RR.L vs. CEA1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RR.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is lower than the CEA1.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RR.L and CEA1.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

RR.LCEA1.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.19

3.23

-2.04

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.53

0.51

+1.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

0.65

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.34

0.53

-0.18

Drawdowns

RR.L vs. CEA1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RR.L drawdown since its inception was -89.20%, which is greater than CEA1.L's maximum drawdown of -33.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RR.L and CEA1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RR.LCEA1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.20%

-33.94%

-55.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.04%

-11.68%

-7.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.78%

-17.35%

-4.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-55.09%

-28.87%

-26.22%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-89.20%

-33.94%

-55.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.91%

-2.67%

-4.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.66%

-11.09%

-11.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.81%

3.36%

+3.45%

Volatility

RR.L vs. CEA1.L - Volatility Comparison

Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC (RR.L) has a higher volatility of 13.28% compared to iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.L) at 8.22%. This indicates that RR.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEA1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RR.LCEA1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.28%

8.22%

+5.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

30.84%

15.73%

+15.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

35.95%

18.45%

+17.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

42.02%

17.81%

+24.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

48.57%

18.53%

+30.04%

Dividends

RR.L vs. CEA1.L - Dividend Comparison

RR.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.75%, while CEA1.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CEA1.L
iShares MSCI EM Asia 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%
RR.L
Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC		0.75%0.91%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%1.71%1.43%3.07%1.83%4.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

RR.L and CEA1.L have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RR.L and CEA1.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