ECAR.L vs. XNNS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ECAR.L (iShares Electric Vehicles and Driving Technology UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and XNNS.L (Xtrackers MSCI Innovation UCITS ETF 1C) are both Technology Equities funds tracking the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD, from iShares and DWS respectively. Both are passively managed. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ECAR.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for XNNS.L.

Performance

ECAR.L vs. XNNS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Electric Vehicles and Driving Technology UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ECAR.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XNNS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

ECAR.L is traded in USD, while XNNS.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the XNNS.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

ECAR.L

• 1D: -1.93%
• 1M: 20.58%
• YTD: 57.85%
• 6M: 59.03%
• 1Y: 91.94%
• 3Y*: 27.13%
• 5Y*: 12.46%
• 10Y*: —

XNNS.L

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ECAR.L vs. XNNS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
ECAR.L iShares Electric Vehicles and Driving Technology UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	57.85%	24.33%	-0.93%	27.09%	-5.96%
XNNS.L Xtrackers MSCI Innovation UCITS ETF 1C	-7.38%	14.28%	22.03%	33.40%	-11.21%

Correlation

The correlation between ECAR.L and XNNS.L is 0.63, 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	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 21, 2022	0.76

The correlation between ECAR.L and XNNS.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.63 (1 year) to 0.76 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ECAR.L vs. XNNS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECAR.L

ECAR.L Risk / Return Rank: 92
ECAR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
ECAR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
ECAR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 89
ECAR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
ECAR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

ECAR.L vs. XNNS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Electric Vehicles and Driving Technology UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ECAR.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XNNS.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.

	ECAR.L	XNNS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.53	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.60	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.02	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.74	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ECAR.L	XNNS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.53	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.62	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	ECAR.L	XNNS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.77%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.34%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-36.21%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.93%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.56%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.21%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ECAR.L	XNNS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.68%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.36%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.91%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.72%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.69%	—	—

ECAR.L vs. XNNS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECAR.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than XNNS.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

ECAR.L vs. XNNS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ECAR.L nor XNNS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ECAR.L and XNNS.L in my portfolio?

ECAR.L and XNNS.L have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ECAR.L or XNNS.L?

On fees, XNNS.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ECAR.L or XNNS.L?

XNNS.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for ECAR.L.

What is the main difference between ECAR.L and XNNS.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ECAR.L and 0.35% for XNNS.L.