PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

XMCX.L (Xtrackers FTSE 250 UCITS ETF 1D) and CMB1.L (iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both Europe Equities funds - XMCX.L tracks the FTSE 250 Ex Investment Trust TR GBP while CMB1.L tracks the FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMCX.L returned 7.21%/yr vs 17.45%/yr for CMB1.L. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMCX.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CMB1.L.

Performance

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers FTSE 250 UCITS ETF 1D (XMCX.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMCX.L achieves a 4.74% return, which is significantly lower than CMB1.L's 16.99% return. Over the past 10 years, XMCX.L has underperformed CMB1.L with an annualized return of 7.21%, while CMB1.L has yielded a comparatively higher 17.45% annualized return.

XMCX.L

1D
0.52%
1M
-0.51%
YTD
4.74%
6M
5.46%
1Y
12.31%
3Y*
12.34%
5Y*
3.44%
10Y*
7.21%

CMB1.L

1D
0.03%
1M
3.29%
YTD
16.99%
6M
17.62%
1Y
38.46%
3Y*
29.77%
5Y*
20.58%
10Y*
17.45%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMCX.L
Xtrackers FTSE 250 UCITS ETF 1D		4.74%12.97%7.76%7.59%-17.47%16.28%-5.13%29.27%-13.42%17.78%
CMB1.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)		16.99%43.83%13.25%30.68%-3.56%18.29%1.52%24.83%-13.79%22.48%

Correlation

The correlation between XMCX.L and CMB1.L is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.49

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

0.61

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

0.65

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

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2010

0.60

The correlation between XMCX.L and CMB1.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.65 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMCX.L
CMB1.L

Industrials

20.1%
11.1%

Financial Services

19.6%
47.2%

Consumer Cyclical

13.4%
9.2%

Technology

9.5%
6.0%

Real Estate

9.1%
0.3%

Basic Materials

6.7%
0.5%

Communication Services

6.0%
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

5.5%
0.4%

Healthcare

4.5%
1.1%

Utilities

3.1%
15.3%

Energy

2.6%
7.2%

Industrials

XMCX.L
20.1%
CMB1.L
11.1%

Financial Services

XMCX.L
19.6%
CMB1.L
47.2%

Consumer Cyclical

XMCX.L
13.4%
CMB1.L
9.2%

Technology

XMCX.L
9.5%
CMB1.L
6.0%

Real Estate

XMCX.L
9.1%
CMB1.L
0.3%

Basic Materials

XMCX.L
6.7%
CMB1.L
0.5%

Communication Services

XMCX.L
6.0%
CMB1.L
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

XMCX.L
5.5%
CMB1.L
0.4%

Healthcare

XMCX.L
4.5%
CMB1.L
1.1%

Utilities

XMCX.L
3.1%
CMB1.L
15.3%

Energy

XMCX.L
2.6%
CMB1.L
7.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Xtrackers FTSE 250 UCITS ETF 1D

iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)

Often compared with XMCX.L:
XMCX.L vs. VMID.LXMCX.L vs. TDGB.LXMCX.L vs. IMV.LXMCX.L vs. WDEP.LXMCX.L vs. FLXD.LXMCX.L vs. NKE.DEXMCX.L vs. XCX5.L
Often compared with CMB1.L:
CMB1.L vs. XDEM.LCMB1.L vs. H50E.LCMB1.L vs. IITU.LCMB1.L vs. SPYCMB1.L vs. IQSA.LCMB1.L vs. X7PP.LCMB1.L vs. EQQQ.L

Return for Risk

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMCX.L
XMCX.L Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
XMCX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMCX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMCX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
XMCX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMCX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank
CMB1.L
CMB1.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
CMB1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMB1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers FTSE 250 UCITS ETF 1D (XMCX.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.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.

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.

XMCX.LCMB1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.00
2.54

-1.54

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.51
3.42

-1.91

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.44

-0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.03

3.71

-2.68

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.67

13.55

-9.87

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMCX.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.00, which is lower than the CMB1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMCX.L and CMB1.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...

Drawdowns

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMCX.L drawdown since its inception was -50.04%, smaller than the maximum CMB1.L drawdown of -56.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMCX.L and CMB1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMCX.LCMB1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-50.04%

-56.05%

+6.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.95%

-10.32%

-1.63%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.34%

-15.62%

-0.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.77%

-24.19%

-5.58%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.35%

-36.61%

-4.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.43%

-2.84%

+1.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.15%

-15.20%

+6.05%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.34%

2.83%

+0.51%

Volatility

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers FTSE 250 UCITS ETF 1D (XMCX.L) is 3.34%, while iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L) has a volatility of 3.96%. This indicates that XMCX.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CMB1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMCX.LCMB1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.34%

3.96%

-0.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.28%

12.40%

-2.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.29%

15.07%

-2.78%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.96%

18.01%

-3.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.92%

20.12%

-4.20%

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMCX.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than CMB1.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMCX.L vs. CMB1.L - Dividend Comparison

XMCX.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.69%, while CMB1.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CMB1.L
iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XMCX.L
Xtrackers FTSE 250 UCITS ETF 1D		3.69%3.61%4.07%3.17%5.37%1.37%2.96%3.44%3.97%2.80%2.84%0.41%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMCX.L and CMB1.L have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

XMCX.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CMB1.L.

XMCX.L tracks FTSE 250 Ex Investment Trust TR GBP, while CMB1.L tracks FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for XMCX.L and 0.33% for CMB1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMCX.L and CMB1.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