SLXX.L vs. AGBP.L
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Core £ Corp Bond UCITS ETF (SLXX.L) and iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (AGBP.L).
SLXX.L and AGBP.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. SLXX.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Markit iBoxx GBP Liquid Corporates Large Cap Index. It was launched on Mar 29, 2004. AGBP.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg Global Aggregate TR Hdg GBP. It was launched on Nov 21, 2017. Both SLXX.L and AGBP.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: SLXX.L or AGBP.L.
Key characteristics
| SLXX.L | AGBP.L | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 1.55% | 3.57% |
| 1Y Return | 10.97% | 10.45% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -3.15% | -2.13% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | -1.04% | -1.45% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.82 | 2.37 |
| Sortino Ratio | 2.71 | 3.77 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.33 | 1.46 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.48 | 0.59 |
| Martin Ratio | 7.20 | 11.86 |
| Ulcer Index | 1.52% | 0.91% |
| Daily Std Dev | 6.04% | 4.60% |
| Max Drawdown | -30.27% | -18.79% |
| Current Drawdown | -13.69% | -9.60% |
Correlation
The correlation between SLXX.L and AGBP.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
SLXX.L vs. AGBP.L - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, SLXX.L achieves a 1.55% return, which is significantly lower than AGBP.L's 3.57% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
SLXX.L vs. AGBP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
SLXX.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than AGBP.L's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
SLXX.L vs. AGBP.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core £ Corp Bond UCITS ETF (SLXX.L) and iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (AGBP.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
SLXX.L vs. AGBP.L - Dividend Comparison
SLXX.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.56%, more than AGBP.L's 2.58% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SLXX.L iShares Core £ Corp Bond UCITS ETF | 4.56% | 4.06% | 2.75% | 2.06% | 2.12% | 2.44% | 2.71% | 2.73% | 2.99% | 3.39% | 3.41% | 3.74% |
AGBP.L iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 2.58% | 91.82% | 156.06% | 127.45% | 153.09% | 164.90% | 97.62% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
SLXX.L vs. AGBP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SLXX.L drawdown since its inception was -30.27%, which is greater than AGBP.L's maximum drawdown of -18.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SLXX.L and AGBP.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
SLXX.L vs. AGBP.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Core £ Corp Bond UCITS ETF (SLXX.L) and iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (AGBP.L) have volatilities of 2.08% and 2.05%, 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.