PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
500U.L vs. XWLD.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

500U.L vs. XWLD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500U.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World UCITS ETF 1C (XWLD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

500U.L is traded in USD, while XWLD.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the XWLD.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with 500U.L having a 10.41% return and XWLD.L slightly lower at 9.95%. Over the past 10 years, 500U.L has outperformed XWLD.L with an annualized return of 15.69%, while XWLD.L has yielded a comparatively lower 13.10% annualized return.


500U.L

1D
-0.02%
1M
3.27%
YTD
10.41%
6M
10.80%
1Y
27.61%
3Y*
22.30%
5Y*
13.83%
10Y*
15.69%

XWLD.L

1D
0.12%
1M
2.47%
YTD
9.95%
6M
10.68%
1Y
25.81%
3Y*
20.72%
5Y*
11.88%
10Y*
13.10%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

500U.L vs. XWLD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
500U.L
Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc
10.41%17.98%24.83%26.85%-19.06%30.19%18.05%32.02%-5.58%21.10%
XWLD.L
Xtrackers MSCI World UCITS ETF 1C
9.95%21.09%19.07%23.78%-18.21%22.59%15.59%28.15%-9.19%22.44%

Correlation

The correlation between 500U.L and XWLD.L is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.91

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

0.91

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

0.90

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

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 29, 2014

0.71

Over the past year, 500U.L and XWLD.L have become more correlated (0.91) than their long-term average of 0.71, meaning their price movements have been converging.

500U.L vs. XWLD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
500U.L
XWLD.L

Technology

35.6%
28.3%

Financial Services

11.8%
15.7%

Communication Services

11.2%
9.3%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
9.3%

Healthcare

8.5%
8.8%

Industrials

8.3%
11.4%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
5.2%

Energy

3.5%
4.2%

Utilities

2.4%
2.7%

Real Estate

1.9%
1.9%

Basic Materials

1.8%
3.3%

Technology

500U.L
35.6%
XWLD.L
28.3%

Financial Services

500U.L
11.8%
XWLD.L
15.7%

Communication Services

500U.L
11.2%
XWLD.L
9.3%

Consumer Cyclical

500U.L
10.1%
XWLD.L
9.3%

Healthcare

500U.L
8.5%
XWLD.L
8.8%

Industrials

500U.L
8.3%
XWLD.L
11.4%

Consumer Defensive

500U.L
4.9%
XWLD.L
5.2%

Energy

500U.L
3.5%
XWLD.L
4.2%

Utilities

500U.L
2.4%
XWLD.L
2.7%

Real Estate

500U.L
1.9%
XWLD.L
1.9%

Basic Materials

500U.L
1.8%
XWLD.L
3.3%

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

500U.L vs. XWLD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

500U.L
500U.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
500U.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
500U.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
500U.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
500U.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
500U.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank

XWLD.L
XWLD.L Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
XWLD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XWLD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
XWLD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
XWLD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
XWLD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
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.

500U.L vs. XWLD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500U.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World UCITS ETF 1C (XWLD.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.


500U.LXWLD.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.41

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.34

3.00

+0.34

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.61

13.12

+1.49

500U.L vs. XWLD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 500U.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is comparable to the XWLD.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 500U.L and XWLD.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


500U.LXWLD.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.41

2.29

+0.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.88

0.77

+0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.12

0.84

+0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.23

0.71

+0.52

Drawdowns

500U.L vs. XWLD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 500U.L drawdown since its inception was -34.04%, roughly equal to the maximum XWLD.L drawdown of -33.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 500U.L and XWLD.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


500U.LXWLD.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.04%

-33.46%

-0.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.34%

-8.66%

+0.32%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.29%

-17.90%

-0.39%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.22%

-26.63%

+2.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.04%

-33.46%

-0.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.51%

-0.43%

-0.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.73%

-4.71%

-0.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.91%

1.98%

-0.07%

Volatility

500U.L vs. XWLD.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500U.L) has a higher volatility of 3.21% compared to Xtrackers MSCI World UCITS ETF 1C (XWLD.L) at 2.78%. This indicates that 500U.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XWLD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


500U.LXWLD.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.21%

2.78%

+0.43%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.54%

8.54%

0.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.57%

11.35%

+0.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.79%

15.32%

+0.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.26%

15.68%

+2.58%

500U.L vs. XWLD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

500U.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than XWLD.L's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

500U.L vs. XWLD.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither 500U.L nor XWLD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, 500U.L and XWLD.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, 500U.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

500U.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for XWLD.L.

500U.L is categorized as S&P 500, while XWLD.L is Global Equities. 500U.L tracks S&P 500 Index, while XWLD.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for 500U.L and 0.19% for XWLD.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 500U.L and XWLD.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