PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares S&P 500 Financials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (UIFS.L) and iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UIFS.L achieves a -4.82% return, which is significantly lower than IWDA.L's 10.12% return. Over the past 10 years, UIFS.L has underperformed IWDA.L with an annualized return of 13.04%, while IWDA.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.89% annualized return.


UIFS.L

1D
3.20%
1M
2.23%
YTD
-4.82%
6M
-2.63%
1Y
4.61%
3Y*
15.44%
5Y*
9.10%
10Y*
13.04%

IWDA.L

1D
0.00%
1M
4.88%
YTD
10.12%
6M
10.06%
1Y
27.03%
3Y*
17.69%
5Y*
13.03%
10Y*
13.89%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UIFS.L
iShares S&P 500 Financials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-4.82%7.07%32.24%6.12%-0.45%38.07%-6.59%27.05%-9.40%12.02%
IWDA.L
iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
10.28%12.41%21.19%18.05%-8.38%23.34%12.65%22.29%-3.62%12.15%

Correlation

The correlation between UIFS.L and IWDA.L is 0.54, 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

0.54

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

0.60

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

0.66

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

0.67

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 24, 2015

0.69

The correlation between UIFS.L and IWDA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.54 (1 year) to 0.69 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
UIFS.L
IWDA.L

Financial Services

98.1%
14.9%

Technology

1.7%
32.9%

Industrials

0.2%
9.7%

Basic Materials

-

2.8%

Communication Services

-

9.3%

Consumer Cyclical

-

8.8%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.8%

Energy

-

3.9%

Healthcare

-

8.6%

Real Estate

-

1.2%

Utilities

-

2.4%

Financial Services

UIFS.L
98.1%
IWDA.L
14.9%

Technology

UIFS.L
1.7%
IWDA.L
32.9%

Industrials

UIFS.L
0.2%
IWDA.L
9.7%

Basic Materials

UIFS.L

-

IWDA.L
2.8%

Communication Services

UIFS.L

-

IWDA.L
9.3%

Consumer Cyclical

UIFS.L

-

IWDA.L
8.8%

Consumer Defensive

UIFS.L

-

IWDA.L
4.8%

Energy

UIFS.L

-

IWDA.L
3.9%

Healthcare

UIFS.L

-

IWDA.L
8.6%

Real Estate

UIFS.L

-

IWDA.L
1.2%

Utilities

UIFS.L

-

IWDA.L
2.4%

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

UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

UIFS.L
UIFS.L Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
UIFS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UIFS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
UIFS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
UIFS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
UIFS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

IWDA.L
IWDA.L Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
IWDA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWDA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P 500 Financials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (UIFS.L) and iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.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.


UIFS.LIWDA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.99

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.67

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.43

-0.37

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.36

4.22

-3.87

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.83

15.90

-15.07

UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UIFS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.33, which is lower than the IWDA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UIFS.L and IWDA.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


UIFS.LIWDA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.33

2.32

-1.99

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

0.90

-0.38

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.65

0.89

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.62

0.86

-0.24

Drawdowns

UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UIFS.L drawdown since its inception was -35.31%, which is greater than IWDA.L's maximum drawdown of -26.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UIFS.L and IWDA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


UIFS.LIWDA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.31%

-26.18%

-9.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.90%

-6.37%

-6.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.72%

-18.91%

+0.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.72%

-18.91%

+0.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.31%

-26.18%

-9.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.76%

-0.27%

-6.49%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.08%

-3.39%

-2.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.53%

1.70%

+3.83%

Volatility

UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares S&P 500 Financials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (UIFS.L) has a higher volatility of 4.41% compared to iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IWDA.L) at 3.47%. This indicates that UIFS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWDA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


UIFS.LIWDA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.41%

3.47%

+0.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.58%

8.85%

+1.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.98%

11.62%

+2.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.54%

14.49%

+3.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.12%

15.51%

+4.61%

UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

UIFS.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than IWDA.L's 0.20% 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%.


Dividends

UIFS.L vs. IWDA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither UIFS.L nor IWDA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


UIFS.L and IWDA.L have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, UIFS.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

UIFS.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for IWDA.L.

UIFS.L is categorized as Financials Equities, while IWDA.L is Global Equities. UIFS.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Financials Index, while IWDA.L tracks MSCI World Index (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.15% for UIFS.L and 0.20% for IWDA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UIFS.L and IWDA.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