ANXG.L vs. NESP.L
ANXG.L (Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD) and NESP.L (Invesco Nasdaq-100 ESG UCITS ETF Acc) are both Nasdaq-100 funds - ANXG.L tracks the NASDAQ-100 Index while NESP.L tracks the Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ANXG.L returned 22.81%/yr vs 24.39%/yr for NESP.L. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. ANXG.L charges 0.13%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for NESP.L.
Performance
ANXG.L vs. NESP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ANXG.L achieves a 15.71% return, which is significantly lower than NESP.L's 18.42% return.
ANXG.L
- 1D
- -1.48%
- 1M
- -3.92%
- 6M
- 15.70%
- YTD
- 15.71%
- 1Y
- 27.57%
- 3Y*
- 22.81%
- 5Y*
- 16.01%
- 10Y*
- 17.57%
NESP.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -2.03%
- 6M
- 18.65%
- YTD
- 18.42%
- 1Y
- 31.08%
- 3Y*
- 24.39%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ANXG.L vs. NESP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ANXG.L Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD | 15.71% | 11.70% | 28.70% | 48.00% | -25.42% | 9.27% |
NESP.L Invesco Nasdaq-100 ESG UCITS ETF Acc | 18.42% | 12.78% | 28.66% | 48.13% | -24.48% | -20.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between ANXG.L and NESP.L is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2021 | 0.98 |
The correlation between ANXG.L and NESP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
ANXG.L vs. NESP.L — Risk / Return Rank
ANXG.L
NESP.L
ANXG.L vs. NESP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXG.L) and Invesco Nasdaq-100 ESG UCITS ETF Acc (NESP.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.
| ANXG.L | NESP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.32 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.49 | 2.61 | -0.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.99 | 7.15 | -0.16 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ANXG.L vs. NESP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ANXG.L drawdown since its inception was -33.00%, smaller than the maximum NESP.L drawdown of -40.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ANXG.L and NESP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ANXG.L | NESP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.00% | -40.98% | +7.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.04% | -11.96% | +0.92% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.54% | -24.75% | +0.21% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.69% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.00% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.95% | -3.11% | -1.84% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.01% | -15.66% | +9.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.94% | 4.36% | -0.42% |
Volatility
ANXG.L vs. NESP.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXG.L) is 6.33%, while Invesco Nasdaq-100 ESG UCITS ETF Acc (NESP.L) has a volatility of 6.70%. This indicates that ANXG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NESP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ANXG.L | NESP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.33% | 6.70% | -0.37% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.58% | 13.39% | -0.81% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.53% | 17.50% | -0.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.40% | 23.55% | -4.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.14% | 23.55% | -2.41% |
ANXG.L vs. NESP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ANXG.L has a 0.13% expense ratio, which is lower than NESP.L's 0.25% 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
ANXG.L vs. NESP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither ANXG.L nor NESP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.98, ANXG.L and NESP.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, ANXG.L is cheaper at 0.13% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ANXG.L is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for NESP.L.
ANXG.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while NESP.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for ANXG.L and 0.25% for NESP.L.
Find the right allocation for ANXG.L and NESP.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