PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
SAUS.L vs. EWC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

SAUS.L vs. EWC

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SAUS.L (iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF) and EWC (iShares MSCI Canada ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SAUS.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Australia NR USD, while EWC is a Canada Equities fund tracking the MSCI Canada Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SAUS.L returned 9.11%/yr vs 11.77%/yr for EWC. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SAUS.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EWC.

Performance

SAUS.L vs. EWC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF (SAUS.L) and iShares MSCI Canada ETF (EWC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SAUS.L achieves a 10.24% return, which is significantly higher than EWC's 8.68% return. Over the past 10 years, SAUS.L has underperformed EWC with an annualized return of 9.11%, while EWC has yielded a comparatively higher 11.77% annualized return.

SAUS.L

1D
-0.76%
1M
-2.38%
YTD
10.24%
6M
11.26%
1Y
14.59%
3Y*
9.70%
5Y*
6.61%
10Y*
9.11%

EWC

1D
-1.73%
1M
1.58%
YTD
8.68%
6M
9.79%
1Y
32.33%
3Y*
18.51%
5Y*
12.29%
10Y*
11.77%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SAUS.L vs. EWC - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SAUS.L
iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF		10.24%6.23%3.26%7.65%5.74%9.68%5.72%17.21%-6.78%8.05%
EWC
iShares MSCI Canada ETF		8.68%26.24%14.34%8.99%-2.60%28.18%2.42%22.73%-12.25%5.72%

Correlation

The correlation between SAUS.L and EWC is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.48

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

0.50

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

0.52

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

0.52

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2010

0.51

The correlation between SAUS.L and EWC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

SAUS.L vs. EWC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
SAUS.L
EWC

Financial Services

42.0%
38.1%

Basic Materials

25.6%
14.8%

Consumer Cyclical

6.4%
3.8%

Real Estate

5.2%
0.2%

Healthcare

4.3%

-

Energy

4.2%
19.1%

Industrials

4.2%
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.6%
3.3%

Communication Services

1.9%
0.7%

Utilities

1.6%
2.3%

Technology

1.0%
8.4%

Financial Services

SAUS.L
42.0%
EWC
38.1%

Basic Materials

SAUS.L
25.6%
EWC
14.8%

Consumer Cyclical

SAUS.L
6.4%
EWC
3.8%

Real Estate

SAUS.L
5.2%
EWC
0.2%

Healthcare

SAUS.L
4.3%
EWC

-

Energy

SAUS.L
4.2%
EWC
19.1%

Industrials

SAUS.L
4.2%
EWC
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

SAUS.L
3.6%
EWC
3.3%

Communication Services

SAUS.L
1.9%
EWC
0.7%

Utilities

SAUS.L
1.6%
EWC
2.3%

Technology

SAUS.L
1.0%
EWC
8.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF

iShares MSCI Canada ETF

Often compared with SAUS.L:
SAUS.L vs. EWASAUS.L vs. CSPX.LSAUS.L vs. SPYSAUS.L vs. LAUU.LSAUS.L vs. CP9G.LSAUS.L vs. XKS2.LSAUS.L vs. CNDX.L
Often compared with EWC:
EWC vs. EWAEWC vs. XIU.TOEWC vs. FLCAEWC vs. BBCAEWC vs. SPYEWC vs. VOOEWC vs. EWD

Return for Risk

SAUS.L vs. EWC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
SAUS.L
SAUS.L Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
SAUS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SAUS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
SAUS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3232
Omega Ratio Rank
SAUS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
SAUS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
EWC
EWC Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
EWC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWC Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
EWC Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWC Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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.

SAUS.L vs. EWC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF (SAUS.L) and iShares MSCI Canada ETF (EWC). 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.

SAUS.LEWCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.18
2.52

-1.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.80
3.28

-1.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.44

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.76

4.01

-2.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.76

17.25

-12.50

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

SAUS.L vs. EWC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SAUS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is lower than the EWC Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SAUS.L and EWC, 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

SAUS.LEWCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.18

2.52

-1.34

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.42

0.84

-0.42

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.50

0.67

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.39

0.39

0.00

Drawdowns

SAUS.L vs. EWC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SAUS.L drawdown since its inception was -38.14%, smaller than the maximum EWC drawdown of -45.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SAUS.L and EWC.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

SAUS.LEWCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.14%

-45.68%

+7.54%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.49%

-8.09%

-0.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.11%

-14.34%

-6.77%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.11%

-14.34%

-6.77%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.14%

-35.90%

-2.24%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.58%

-1.73%

-1.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.77%

-8.34%

+0.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.16%

1.88%

+1.28%

Volatility

SAUS.L vs. EWC - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF (SAUS.L) has a higher volatility of 4.46% compared to iShares MSCI Canada ETF (EWC) at 3.86%. This indicates that SAUS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EWC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

SAUS.LEWCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.46%

3.86%

+0.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.14%

9.78%

+0.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.72%

12.88%

-0.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.80%

14.76%

+1.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.11%

17.63%

+1.48%

SAUS.L vs. EWC - Expense Ratio Comparison

SAUS.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than EWC's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

SAUS.L vs. EWC - Dividend Comparison

SAUS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EWC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EWC
iShares MSCI Canada ETF		1.35%1.45%2.23%2.27%2.34%1.85%2.09%2.16%2.65%1.97%1.75%2.34%
SAUS.L
iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

SAUS.L and EWC have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, EWC is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EWC is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for SAUS.L.

SAUS.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while EWC is Canada Equities. SAUS.L tracks MSCI Australia NR USD, while EWC tracks MSCI Canada Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for SAUS.L and 0.49% for EWC.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SAUS.L and EWC

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