DBX9.DE vs. XDWH.DE

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

DBX9.DE (Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C) and XDWH.DE (Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - DBX9.DE is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China 50, while XDWH.DE is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Health Care NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, DBX9.DE returned 3.94%/yr vs 7.61%/yr for XDWH.DE. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DBX9.DE charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XDWH.DE.

Performance

DBX9.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (DBX9.DE) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DBX9.DE achieves a 9.85% return, which is significantly higher than XDWH.DE's -1.98% return. Over the past 10 years, DBX9.DE has underperformed XDWH.DE with an annualized return of 3.94%, while XDWH.DE has yielded a comparatively higher 7.61% annualized return.

DBX9.DE

• 1D: -0.73%
• 1M: 1.75%
• YTD: 9.85%
• 6M: 13.25%
• 1Y: 32.77%
• 3Y*: 13.37%
• 5Y*: 0.17%
• 10Y*: 3.94%

XDWH.DE

• 1D: 2.85%
• 1M: 3.94%
• YTD: -1.98%
• 6M: -1.54%
• 1Y: 9.60%
• 3Y*: 2.67%
• 5Y*: 5.50%
• 10Y*: 7.61%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DBX9.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
DBX9.DE Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C	9.85%	10.01%	37.68%	-16.44%	-13.62%	-14.98%	-0.87%	18.35%	-9.23%	18.88%
XDWH.DE Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C	-1.98%	2.21%	7.44%	0.04%	-0.07%	30.55%	2.69%	27.24%	5.96%	5.52%

Correlation

The correlation between DBX9.DE and XDWH.DE is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.08
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.14
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2016	0.33

The correlation between DBX9.DE and XDWH.DE shifts across timeframes, from 0.08 (3 years) to 0.33 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

DBX9.DE vs. XDWH.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBX9.DE

DBX9.DE Risk / Return Rank: 39
DBX9.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
DBX9.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
DBX9.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 57
DBX9.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
DBX9.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 27

XDWH.DE

XDWH.DE Risk / Return Rank: 21
XDWH.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
XDWH.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
XDWH.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 21
XDWH.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
XDWH.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

DBX9.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (DBX9.DE) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.DE). 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.

	DBX9.DE	XDWH.DE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.24	0.70	+0.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.94	1.14	+0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.13	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.90	0.93	+0.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.67	2.28	+1.39
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DBX9.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DBX9.DE Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is higher than the XDWH.DE Sharpe Ratio of 0.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DBX9.DE and XDWH.DE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DBX9.DE	XDWH.DE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.24	0.70	+0.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.01	0.41	-0.40
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.15	0.51	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.08	0.55	-0.47

Drawdowns

DBX9.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBX9.DE drawdown since its inception was -66.51%, which is greater than XDWH.DE's maximum drawdown of -26.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBX9.DE and XDWH.DE.

Drawdown Indicators

	DBX9.DE	XDWH.DE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.51%	-26.08%	-40.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.20%	-10.32%	-6.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.83%	-21.12%	-6.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-47.59%	-21.12%	-26.47%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-53.98%	-26.08%	-27.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.62%	-8.51%	-6.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-29.50%	-4.82%	-24.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.91%	4.20%	+4.71%

Volatility

DBX9.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (DBX9.DE) has a higher volatility of 5.29% compared to Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.DE) at 4.81%. This indicates that DBX9.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDWH.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DBX9.DE	XDWH.DE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.29%	4.81%	+0.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.45%	9.51%	+0.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.35%	13.69%	+12.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.75%	13.43%	+15.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.42%	14.69%	+10.73%

DBX9.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBX9.DE has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than XDWH.DE's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

DBX9.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Dividend Comparison

Neither DBX9.DE nor XDWH.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DBX9.DE and XDWH.DE in my portfolio?

DBX9.DE and XDWH.DE have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, DBX9.DE or XDWH.DE?

On fees, XDWH.DE is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, DBX9.DE or XDWH.DE?

XDWH.DE is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for DBX9.DE.

What is the main difference between DBX9.DE and XDWH.DE?

DBX9.DE is categorized as China Equities, while XDWH.DE is Health & Biotech Equities. DBX9.DE tracks FTSE China 50, while XDWH.DE tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for DBX9.DE and 0.25% for XDWH.DE.