UMMA vs. HLAL
UMMA (Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF) and HLAL (Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UMMA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Wahed, while HLAL is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the FTSE Shariah USA Index. UMMA is actively managed, while HLAL is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, UMMA returned 21.92%/yr vs 19.26%/yr for HLAL. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UMMA charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for HLAL.
Performance
UMMA vs. HLAL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UMMA achieves a 29.52% return, which is significantly higher than HLAL's 12.94% return.
UMMA
- 1D
- -5.07%
- 1M
- 4.45%
- YTD
- 29.52%
- 6M
- 30.57%
- 1Y
- 50.76%
- 3Y*
- 21.92%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HLAL
- 1D
- -2.47%
- 1M
- -1.61%
- YTD
- 12.94%
- 6M
- 11.97%
- 1Y
- 34.34%
- 3Y*
- 19.26%
- 5Y*
- 14.31%
- 10Y*
- —
UMMA vs. HLAL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF | 29.52% | 26.65% | 4.67% | 18.84% | -21.31% |
HLAL Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF | 12.94% | 18.30% | 16.70% | 30.13% | -16.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between UMMA and HLAL is 0.78, 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 | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 7, 2022 | 0.76 |
The correlation between UMMA and HLAL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
UMMA vs. HLAL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
UMMA
HLAL
Technology
Healthcare
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Communication Services
Real Estate
Financial Services
Utilities
-
Technology
UMMA
HLAL
Healthcare
UMMA
HLAL
Industrials
UMMA
HLAL
Basic Materials
UMMA
HLAL
Consumer Cyclical
UMMA
HLAL
Consumer Defensive
UMMA
HLAL
Energy
UMMA
HLAL
Communication Services
UMMA
HLAL
Real Estate
UMMA
HLAL
Financial Services
UMMA
HLAL
Utilities
UMMA
-
HLAL
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
UMMA vs. HLAL — Risk / Return Rank
UMMA
HLAL
UMMA vs. HLAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA) and Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF (HLAL). 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.
| UMMA | HLAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.43 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.42 | 3.38 | +0.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.07 | 14.57 | -1.50 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UMMA vs. HLAL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UMMA drawdown since its inception was -34.17%, roughly equal to the maximum HLAL drawdown of -33.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMMA and HLAL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UMMA | HLAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.17% | -33.57% | -0.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.93% | -10.20% | -4.73% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.73% | -21.67% | +2.94% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.18% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.07% | -4.93% | -0.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.73% | -4.99% | -4.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.89% | 2.36% | +1.53% |
Volatility
UMMA vs. HLAL - Volatility Comparison
Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA) has a higher volatility of 12.08% compared to Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF (HLAL) at 6.71%. This indicates that UMMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HLAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UMMA | HLAL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.08% | 6.71% | +5.37% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.30% | 11.63% | +8.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.74% | 14.42% | +8.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.08% | 17.80% | +3.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.08% | 20.27% | +0.81% |
UMMA vs. HLAL - Expense Ratio Comparison
UMMA has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than HLAL's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
UMMA vs. HLAL - Dividend Comparison
UMMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, more than HLAL's 0.47% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HLAL Wahed FTSE USA Shariah ETF | 0.47% | 0.53% | 0.58% | 0.72% | 1.15% | 0.78% | 0.97% | 0.72% |
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF | 0.95% | 1.02% | 0.91% | 1.09% | 1.77% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UMMA and HLAL have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UMMA has higher volatility (12.08%) compared to HLAL (6.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMMA dropped -34.17% vs HLAL's -33.57%.
On 3-year performance, UMMA leads with 21.92% vs 19.26% for HLAL. On fees, HLAL is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, HLAL has been the lower-risk option at 6.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, UMMA has performed better with a 21.92% return vs 19.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
HLAL is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for UMMA.
UMMA has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.47% for HLAL.
UMMA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while HLAL is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for UMMA and 0.50% for HLAL.
HLAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 2.24), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for UMMA and HLAL
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