UIFS.L vs. XLFS.L
UIFS.L (iShares S&P 500 Financials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and XLFS.L (Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc) are both Financials Equities funds - UIFS.L tracks the S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Financials Index while XLFS.L tracks the S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Financials Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UIFS.L returned 13.04%/yr vs 13.02%/yr for XLFS.L. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. UIFS.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLFS.L.
Performance
UIFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
UIFS.L is traded in GBp, while XLFS.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XLFS.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 XLFS.L's -4.53% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with UIFS.L having a 13.04% annualized return and XLFS.L not far behind at 13.02%.
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%
XLFS.L
- 1D
- 3.23%
- 1M
- 2.25%
- YTD
- -4.53%
- 6M
- -2.67%
- 1Y
- 4.66%
- 3Y*
- 15.52%
- 5Y*
- 9.11%
- 10Y*
- 13.02%
UIFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
XLFS.L Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc | -4.53% | 6.80% | 32.42% | 6.51% | -0.45% | 37.46% | -7.35% | 27.94% | -9.37% | 12.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between UIFS.L and XLFS.L is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 24, 2015 | 0.95 |
The correlation between UIFS.L and XLFS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.
UIFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
UIFS.L
XLFS.L
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
UIFS.L
XLFS.L
Technology
UIFS.L
XLFS.L
Industrials
UIFS.L
XLFS.L
Basic Materials
UIFS.L
-
XLFS.L
-
Communication Services
UIFS.L
-
XLFS.L
-
Consumer Cyclical
UIFS.L
-
XLFS.L
-
Consumer Defensive
UIFS.L
-
XLFS.L
-
Energy
UIFS.L
-
XLFS.L
-
Healthcare
UIFS.L
-
XLFS.L
-
Real Estate
UIFS.L
-
XLFS.L
-
Utilities
UIFS.L
-
XLFS.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
UIFS.L vs. XLFS.L — Risk / Return Rank
UIFS.L
XLFS.L
UIFS.L vs. XLFS.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 Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.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.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.06 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.36 | 0.35 | 0.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.83 | 0.85 | -0.02 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| UIFS.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 | 0.31 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 | 0.49 | +0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.65 | 0.63 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.62 | 0.61 | +0.01 |
Drawdowns
UIFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UIFS.L drawdown since its inception was -35.31%, roughly equal to the maximum XLFS.L drawdown of -35.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UIFS.L and XLFS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UIFS.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.31% | -35.78% | +0.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.90% | -13.13% | +0.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.72% | -18.78% | +0.06% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.72% | -18.78% | +0.06% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.31% | -35.78% | +0.47% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.76% | -6.47% | -0.29% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.08% | -6.60% | +0.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.53% | 5.45% | +0.08% |
Volatility
UIFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares S&P 500 Financials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (UIFS.L) is 4.41%, while Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.L) has a volatility of 4.68%. This indicates that UIFS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLFS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UIFS.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.41% | 4.68% | -0.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.58% | 11.44% | -0.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.98% | 14.92% | -0.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.54% | 18.54% | -1.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.12% | 20.81% | -0.69% |
UIFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
UIFS.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than XLFS.L's 0.14% 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%.
Dividends
UIFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither UIFS.L nor XLFS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.96, UIFS.L and XLFS.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, XLFS.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLFS.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for UIFS.L.
UIFS.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Financials Index, while XLFS.L tracks S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Financials Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for UIFS.L and 0.14% for XLFS.L.
Find the right allocation for UIFS.L and XLFS.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