PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
WMAT.L vs. ISF.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

WMAT.L (SPDR MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF) and ISF.L (iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - WMAT.L is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Materials NR USD, while ISF.L is a Europe Equities fund tracking the FTSE AllSh TR GBP. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, WMAT.L returned 10.54%/yr vs 8.13%/yr for ISF.L. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. WMAT.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for ISF.L.

Performance

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF (WMAT.L) and iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist) (ISF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WMAT.L achieves a 11.42% return, which is significantly higher than ISF.L's 5.02% return. Over the past 10 years, WMAT.L has outperformed ISF.L with an annualized return of 10.54%, while ISF.L has yielded a comparatively lower 8.13% annualized return.

WMAT.L

1D
-3.31%
1M
-3.08%
YTD
11.42%
6M
15.78%
1Y
27.19%
3Y*
14.04%
5Y*
6.09%
10Y*
10.54%

ISF.L

1D
-0.81%
1M
-2.35%
YTD
5.02%
6M
8.81%
1Y
18.87%
3Y*
17.39%
5Y*
10.53%
10Y*
8.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
WMAT.L
SPDR MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF		11.42%26.36%-5.73%14.40%-10.02%15.63%20.67%22.51%-16.56%27.92%
ISF.L
iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist)		5.02%35.47%7.46%13.50%-6.37%16.61%-8.97%21.81%-14.11%23.87%

Correlation

The correlation between WMAT.L and ISF.L is 0.67, 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

0.67

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

0.72

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

0.76

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

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2009

0.74

The correlation between WMAT.L and ISF.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
WMAT.L
ISF.L

Basic Materials

94.8%
8.6%

Consumer Cyclical

4.2%
4.7%

Technology

0.6%
0.8%

Consumer Defensive

0.4%
12.8%

Industrials

0.4%
13.8%

Communication Services

-

2.6%

Energy

-

11.9%

Financial Services

-

24.8%

Healthcare

-

13.8%

Real Estate

-

0.9%

Utilities

-

5.3%

Basic Materials

WMAT.L
94.8%
ISF.L
8.6%

Consumer Cyclical

WMAT.L
4.2%
ISF.L
4.7%

Technology

WMAT.L
0.6%
ISF.L
0.8%

Consumer Defensive

WMAT.L
0.4%
ISF.L
12.8%

Industrials

WMAT.L
0.4%
ISF.L
13.8%

Communication Services

WMAT.L

-

ISF.L
2.6%

Energy

WMAT.L

-

ISF.L
11.9%

Financial Services

WMAT.L

-

ISF.L
24.8%

Healthcare

WMAT.L

-

ISF.L
13.8%

Real Estate

WMAT.L

-

ISF.L
0.9%

Utilities

WMAT.L

-

ISF.L
5.3%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

SPDR MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF

iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist)

Often compared with WMAT.L:
WMAT.L vs. AINF.LWMAT.L vs. GLDWMAT.L vs. IAUWMAT.L vs. XDWM.LWMAT.L vs. ZPRV.DEWMAT.L vs. XLBS.LWMAT.L vs. IWVL.L
Often compared with ISF.L:
ISF.L vs. VUKE.LISF.L vs. HUKX.LISF.L vs. UKDV.LISF.L vs. XDAX.LISF.L vs. VUSA.ASISF.L vs. VOOISF.L vs. FEUI.L

Return for Risk

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
WMAT.L
WMAT.L Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
WMAT.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WMAT.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
WMAT.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
WMAT.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
WMAT.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank
ISF.L
ISF.L Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
ISF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
ISF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
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.

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF (WMAT.L) and iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist) (ISF.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.

WMAT.LISF.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.39
1.42

-0.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.97
2.02

-0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.26

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.75

1.93

-0.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.61

6.55

+0.06

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WMAT.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is comparable to the ISF.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WMAT.L and ISF.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

WMAT.LISF.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.39

1.42

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.31

0.64

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.54

0.45

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.49

0.18

+0.32

Drawdowns

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WMAT.L drawdown since its inception was -41.30%, smaller than the maximum ISF.L drawdown of -63.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WMAT.L and ISF.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

WMAT.LISF.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.30%

-63.42%

+22.12%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.51%

-9.76%

-5.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.46%

-13.32%

-8.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.08%

-25.73%

-2.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.25%

-41.74%

+3.49%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.94%

-5.08%

-1.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.47%

-14.50%

+3.03%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.11%

2.88%

+1.23%

Volatility

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF (WMAT.L) has a higher volatility of 7.74% compared to iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist) (ISF.L) at 4.27%. This indicates that WMAT.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISF.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

WMAT.LISF.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.74%

4.27%

+3.47%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.68%

11.19%

+5.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.43%

13.27%

+6.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.64%

16.36%

+3.28%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.42%

18.17%

+1.25%

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

WMAT.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than ISF.L's 0.07% expense ratio.

Dividends

WMAT.L vs. ISF.L - Dividend Comparison

WMAT.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ISF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.87%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ISF.L
iShares Core FTSE 100 UCITS ETF (Dist)		2.87%3.01%3.71%3.86%3.75%3.76%3.11%4.47%4.44%3.96%3.79%4.12%
WMAT.L
SPDR MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

WMAT.L and ISF.L have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ISF.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ISF.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for WMAT.L.

WMAT.L is categorized as Industrials Equities, while ISF.L is Europe Equities. WMAT.L tracks MSCI World/Materials NR USD, while ISF.L tracks FTSE AllSh TR GBP. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for WMAT.L and 0.07% for ISF.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for WMAT.L and ISF.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