UB20.L vs. IASH.L
UB20.L (UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) and IASH.L (iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD) are both exchange-traded funds - UB20.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD, while IASH.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UB20.L returned 7.32%/yr vs 5.31%/yr for IASH.L. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UB20.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for IASH.L.
Performance
UB20.L vs. IASH.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UB20.L achieves a 10.97% return, which is significantly higher than IASH.L's 6.11% return. Over the past 10 years, UB20.L has outperformed IASH.L with an annualized return of 7.32%, while IASH.L has yielded a comparatively lower 5.31% annualized return.
UB20.L
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 1.61%
- 6M
- 9.07%
- YTD
- 10.97%
- 1Y
- 16.04%
- 3Y*
- 11.71%
- 5Y*
- 6.54%
- 10Y*
- 7.32%
IASH.L
- 1D
- -1.15%
- 1M
- -3.17%
- 6M
- 3.10%
- YTD
- 6.11%
- 1Y
- 26.99%
- 3Y*
- 9.04%
- 5Y*
- -0.44%
- 10Y*
- 5.31%
UB20.L vs. IASH.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UB20.L UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis | 10.97% | 12.00% | 6.98% | -0.10% | 5.26% | 5.29% | 3.52% | 14.10% | -5.54% | 14.53% |
IASH.L iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD | 6.11% | 17.67% | 12.92% | -18.83% | -17.27% | 4.48% | 37.65% | 30.20% | -22.23% | 19.05% |
Correlation
The correlation between UB20.L and IASH.L is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2015 | 0.47 |
The correlation between UB20.L and IASH.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (3 years) to 0.48 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
UB20.L vs. IASH.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
UB20.L
IASH.L
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Industrials
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Communication Services
Technology
Financial Services
UB20.L
IASH.L
Basic Materials
UB20.L
IASH.L
Industrials
UB20.L
IASH.L
Real Estate
UB20.L
IASH.L
Consumer Cyclical
UB20.L
IASH.L
Utilities
UB20.L
IASH.L
Healthcare
UB20.L
IASH.L
Consumer Defensive
UB20.L
IASH.L
Energy
UB20.L
IASH.L
Communication Services
UB20.L
IASH.L
Technology
UB20.L
IASH.L
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
UB20.L vs. IASH.L — Risk / Return Rank
UB20.L
IASH.L
UB20.L vs. IASH.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB20.L) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD (IASH.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.
| UB20.L | IASH.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.27 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.18 | 3.14 | -0.95 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.04 | 9.17 | -3.13 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UB20.L vs. IASH.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UB20.L drawdown since its inception was -32.34%, smaller than the maximum IASH.L drawdown of -59.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UB20.L and IASH.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UB20.L | IASH.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.34% | -59.37% | +27.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.32% | -8.57% | +1.25% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.80% | -31.16% | +13.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.80% | -42.23% | +24.43% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.34% | -44.67% | +12.33% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.18% | -14.08% | +12.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.49% | -33.06% | +26.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.65% | 2.93% | -0.28% |
Volatility
UB20.L vs. IASH.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB20.L) is 2.64%, while iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD (IASH.L) has a volatility of 8.51%. This indicates that UB20.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IASH.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UB20.L | IASH.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.64% | 8.51% | -5.87% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.07% | 13.42% | -4.35% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.29% | 17.83% | -6.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.00% | 25.10% | -11.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.73% | 23.84% | -8.11% |
UB20.L vs. IASH.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
UB20.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than IASH.L's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
UB20.L vs. IASH.L - Dividend Comparison
UB20.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.87%, while IASH.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IASH.L iShares MSCI China A UCITS USD | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
UB20.L UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis | 2.87% | 3.86% | 3.26% | 3.96% | 3.66% | 2.60% | 3.05% | 4.08% | 4.33% | 3.43% | 4.00% | 5.19% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UB20.L and IASH.L have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, UB20.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
UB20.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for IASH.L.
UB20.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while IASH.L is China Equities. UB20.L tracks MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD, while IASH.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: UBS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for UB20.L and 0.40% for IASH.L.
Find the right allocation for UB20.L and IASH.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