SXRW.DE vs. PPFB.DE
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (SXRW.DE) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (PPFB.DE).
SXRW.DE and PPFB.DE are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. SXRW.DE is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the FTSE 100. It was launched on Jan 26, 2010. PPFB.DE is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Gold. It was launched on Apr 8, 2011. Both SXRW.DE and PPFB.DE 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: SXRW.DE or PPFB.DE.
Key characteristics
| SXRW.DE | PPFB.DE | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 12.93% | 23.81% |
| 1Y Return | 13.94% | 27.74% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 10.03% | 15.30% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.38 | 2.07 |
| Daily Std Dev | 10.60% | 13.39% |
| Max Drawdown | -40.31% | -13.01% |
| Current Drawdown | -1.68% | -0.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between SXRW.DE and PPFB.DE is 0.27, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Performance
SXRW.DE vs. PPFB.DE - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, SXRW.DE achieves a 12.93% return, which is significantly lower than PPFB.DE's 23.81% 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.
SXRW.DE vs. PPFB.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
SXRW.DE has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than PPFB.DE's 0.12% expense ratio. Despite the difference, 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
SXRW.DE vs. PPFB.DE - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (SXRW.DE) and iShares Physical Gold ETC (PPFB.DE). 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
SXRW.DE vs. PPFB.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither SXRW.DE nor PPFB.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
SXRW.DE vs. PPFB.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SXRW.DE drawdown since its inception was -40.31%, which is greater than PPFB.DE's maximum drawdown of -13.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SXRW.DE and PPFB.DE. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
SXRW.DE vs. PPFB.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (SXRW.DE) is 3.21%, while iShares Physical Gold ETC (PPFB.DE) has a volatility of 3.57%. This indicates that SXRW.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PPFB.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.