PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
URTH vs. CRPS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

URTH vs. CRPS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) and iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (CRPS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

URTH is traded in USD, while CRPS.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the CRPS.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, URTH achieves a 6.28% return, which is significantly higher than CRPS.L's -0.60% return. Over the past 10 years, URTH has outperformed CRPS.L with an annualized return of 12.94%, while CRPS.L has yielded a comparatively lower 2.08% annualized return.


URTH

1D
-1.47%
1M
-1.71%
YTD
6.28%
6M
6.36%
1Y
20.43%
3Y*
19.23%
5Y*
10.91%
10Y*
12.94%

CRPS.L

1D
-0.08%
1M
-0.59%
YTD
-0.60%
6M
-0.20%
1Y
4.43%
3Y*
5.66%
5Y*
-0.17%
10Y*
2.08%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

URTH vs. CRPS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
URTH
iShares MSCI World ETF
6.28%21.36%18.66%23.95%-17.97%22.27%15.78%28.15%-8.56%22.95%
CRPS.L
iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF
-0.60%10.18%0.99%8.30%-15.97%-3.55%10.06%12.71%-4.10%8.47%

Correlation

The correlation between URTH and CRPS.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

0.36

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

0.38

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

0.29

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2012

0.21

Over the past year, URTH and CRPS.L have become more correlated (0.42) than their long-term average of 0.21, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

URTH vs. CRPS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

URTH
URTH Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
URTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
URTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
URTH Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
URTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
URTH Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

CRPS.L
CRPS.L Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
CRPS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CRPS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
CRPS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
CRPS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
CRPS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
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.

URTH vs. CRPS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) and iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (CRPS.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.


URTHCRPS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.89

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.13

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.26

1.12

+1.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.08

3.53

+6.55

URTH vs. CRPS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URTH Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is higher than the CRPS.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URTH and CRPS.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


URTHCRPS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.65

0.77

+0.89

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

-0.02

+0.70

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.75

0.28

+0.47

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.71

-0.11

+0.82

Drawdowns

URTH vs. CRPS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URTH drawdown since its inception was -34.01%, smaller than the maximum CRPS.L drawdown of -40.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URTH and CRPS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


URTHCRPS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.01%

-40.05%

+6.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.06%

-3.93%

-5.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.94%

-6.30%

-10.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.05%

-24.87%

-1.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.01%

-25.57%

-8.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.24%

-17.87%

+13.63%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.37%

-28.63%

+24.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.03%

1.25%

+0.78%

Volatility

URTH vs. CRPS.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI World ETF (URTH) has a higher volatility of 4.03% compared to iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF (CRPS.L) at 1.58%. This indicates that URTH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CRPS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


URTHCRPS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.03%

1.58%

+2.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.92%

4.25%

+5.67%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.42%

5.75%

+6.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.24%

7.55%

+8.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.28%

7.39%

+9.89%

URTH vs. CRPS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

URTH has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is higher than CRPS.L's 0.20% 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

URTH vs. CRPS.L - Dividend Comparison

URTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%, less than CRPS.L's 4.25% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CRPS.L
iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF
4.25%4.12%3.87%3.34%2.55%2.07%2.42%2.75%2.56%2.61%2.45%2.58%
URTH
iShares MSCI World ETF
1.40%1.48%1.47%1.70%1.68%1.50%1.52%2.16%2.30%1.88%2.15%2.35%

Frequently Asked Questions


URTH and CRPS.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, CRPS.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CRPS.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for URTH.

URTH is categorized as Global Equities, while CRPS.L is Global Corporate Bonds. URTH tracks MSCI World Index (Net), while CRPS.L tracks Bloomberg Gbl Agg Corp TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for URTH and 0.20% for CRPS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for URTH and CRPS.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