PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
UD02.L vs. CMB1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

UD02.L (UBS ETF (LU) Factor MSCI EMU Low Volatility UCITS ETF (EUR) A-dis) and CMB1.L (iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both Europe Equities funds - UD02.L tracks the MSCI EMU NR EUR while CMB1.L tracks the FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UD02.L returned 7.91%/yr vs 17.45%/yr for CMB1.L. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UD02.L charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CMB1.L.

Performance

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (LU) Factor MSCI EMU Low Volatility UCITS ETF (EUR) A-dis (UD02.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UD02.L achieves a 8.93% return, which is significantly lower than CMB1.L's 16.99% return. Over the past 10 years, UD02.L has underperformed CMB1.L with an annualized return of 7.91%, while CMB1.L has yielded a comparatively higher 17.45% annualized return.

UD02.L

1D
0.76%
1M
2.18%
YTD
8.93%
6M
9.35%
1Y
14.57%
3Y*
12.40%
5Y*
6.66%
10Y*
7.91%

CMB1.L

1D
0.03%
1M
3.29%
YTD
16.99%
6M
17.62%
1Y
38.46%
3Y*
29.77%
5Y*
20.58%
10Y*
17.45%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UD02.L
UBS ETF (LU) Factor MSCI EMU Low Volatility UCITS ETF (EUR) A-dis		8.93%22.44%0.56%9.91%-9.99%11.20%-2.65%16.38%-5.80%18.66%
CMB1.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)		16.99%43.83%13.25%30.68%-3.56%18.29%1.52%24.83%-13.79%22.48%

Correlation

The correlation between UD02.L and CMB1.L is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.55

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

0.66

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

0.69

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

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 18, 2015

0.71

The correlation between UD02.L and CMB1.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.71 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
UD02.L
CMB1.L

Financial Services

22.8%
47.2%

Industrials

19.0%
11.1%

Utilities

18.7%
15.3%

Consumer Defensive

18.3%
0.4%

Communication Services

8.6%
1.8%

Healthcare

3.2%
1.1%

Real Estate

3.1%
0.3%

Basic Materials

2.8%
0.5%

Energy

2.2%
7.2%

Consumer Cyclical

1.4%
9.2%

Technology

-

6.0%

Financial Services

UD02.L
22.8%
CMB1.L
47.2%

Industrials

UD02.L
19.0%
CMB1.L
11.1%

Utilities

UD02.L
18.7%
CMB1.L
15.3%

Consumer Defensive

UD02.L
18.3%
CMB1.L
0.4%

Communication Services

UD02.L
8.6%
CMB1.L
1.8%

Healthcare

UD02.L
3.2%
CMB1.L
1.1%

Real Estate

UD02.L
3.1%
CMB1.L
0.3%

Basic Materials

UD02.L
2.8%
CMB1.L
0.5%

Energy

UD02.L
2.2%
CMB1.L
7.2%

Consumer Cyclical

UD02.L
1.4%
CMB1.L
9.2%

Technology

UD02.L

-

CMB1.L
6.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

UBS ETF (LU) Factor MSCI EMU Low Volatility UCITS ETF (EUR) A-dis

iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)

Often compared with UD02.L:
UD02.L vs. FEUZ.LUD02.L vs. VLEU.DEUD02.L vs. EEIP.LUD02.L vs. SX5S.LUD02.L vs. HDEU.LUD02.L vs. IMV.LUD02.L vs. CEUR.L
Often compared with CMB1.L:
CMB1.L vs. XDEM.LCMB1.L vs. H50E.LCMB1.L vs. IITU.LCMB1.L vs. SPYCMB1.L vs. IQSA.LCMB1.L vs. X7PP.LCMB1.L vs. EQQQ.L

Return for Risk

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
UD02.L
UD02.L Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
UD02.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UD02.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
UD02.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
UD02.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
UD02.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank
CMB1.L
CMB1.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
CMB1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) Factor MSCI EMU Low Volatility UCITS ETF (EUR) A-dis (UD02.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.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.

UD02.LCMB1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.35
2.54

-1.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.78
3.42

-1.64

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.44

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.41

3.71

-2.30

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.14

13.55

-9.41

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UD02.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is lower than the CMB1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UD02.L and CMB1.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...

Drawdowns

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UD02.L drawdown since its inception was -33.25%, smaller than the maximum CMB1.L drawdown of -56.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UD02.L and CMB1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

UD02.LCMB1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.25%

-56.05%

+22.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.54%

-10.32%

+0.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.54%

-15.62%

+6.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.37%

-24.19%

+2.82%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-29.80%

-36.61%

+6.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.11%

-2.84%

+0.73%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.23%

-15.20%

+7.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.26%

2.83%

+0.43%

Volatility

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for UBS ETF (LU) Factor MSCI EMU Low Volatility UCITS ETF (EUR) A-dis (UD02.L) is 2.23%, while iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L) has a volatility of 3.96%. This indicates that UD02.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMB1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

UD02.LCMB1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.23%

3.96%

-1.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.30%

12.40%

-4.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.94%

15.07%

-5.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.43%

18.01%

-5.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.83%

20.12%

-6.29%

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

UD02.L has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than CMB1.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

UD02.L vs. CMB1.L - Dividend Comparison

UD02.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.26%, while CMB1.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
CMB1.L
iShares FTSE MIB 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%
UD02.L
UBS ETF (LU) Factor MSCI EMU Low Volatility UCITS ETF (EUR) A-dis		2.26%3.03%4.76%2.56%2.38%2.25%2.16%2.80%2.65%1.92%2.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

UD02.L and CMB1.L have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, UD02.L is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

UD02.L is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CMB1.L.

UD02.L tracks MSCI EMU NR EUR, while CMB1.L tracks FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. They also come from different issuers: UBS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for UD02.L and 0.33% for CMB1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UD02.L and CMB1.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