EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EDOC.L (Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health UCITS ETF Acc USD) and XLVP.L (Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds tracking the MSCI World/Health Care NR USD, from Global X and Invesco respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EDOC.L returned -10.35%/yr vs 5.77%/yr for XLVP.L. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EDOC.L charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLVP.L.

Performance

EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health UCITS ETF Acc USD (EDOC.L) and Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF (XLVP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EDOC.L achieves a -1.79% return, which is significantly higher than XLVP.L's -2.08% return.

EDOC.L

• 1D: 4.72%
• 1M: 8.24%
• YTD: -1.79%
• 6M: -5.83%
• 1Y: 2.42%
• 3Y*: -2.41%
• 5Y*: -10.35%
• 10Y*: —

XLVP.L

• 1D: 3.15%
• 1M: 5.01%
• YTD: -2.08%
• 6M: -0.40%
• 1Y: 15.22%
• 3Y*: 6.48%
• 5Y*: 5.77%
• 10Y*: 9.19%

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

EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EDOC.L Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health UCITS ETF Acc USD	-1.79%	9.53%	-3.40%	-12.13%	-29.43%	-14.38%	1.21%
XLVP.L Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF	-2.08%	14.98%	2.05%	1.20%	-2.68%	27.97%	0.36%

Correlation

The correlation between EDOC.L and XLVP.L is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 21, 2020	0.42

EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EDOC.L	XLVP.L
Healthcare	100.0%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EDOC.L

EDOC.L Risk / Return Rank: 10
EDOC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
EDOC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
EDOC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 11
EDOC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
EDOC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 10

XLVP.L

XLVP.L Risk / Return Rank: 29
XLVP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
XLVP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
XLVP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 29
XLVP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
XLVP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health UCITS ETF Acc USD (EDOC.L) and Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF (XLVP.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.

	EDOC.L	XLVP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.11	1.02	-0.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.32	1.60	-1.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	1.18	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.10	1.45	-1.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.23	3.58	-3.35
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EDOC.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.11, which is lower than the XLVP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EDOC.L and XLVP.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EDOC.L	XLVP.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11	1.02	-0.90
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.41	0.39	-0.81
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.58	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.40	0.58	-0.98

Drawdowns

EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EDOC.L drawdown since its inception was -64.69%, which is greater than XLVP.L's maximum drawdown of -26.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDOC.L and XLVP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	EDOC.L	XLVP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.69%	-26.93%	-37.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.06%	-10.44%	-12.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.88%	-17.66%	-15.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-58.75%	-17.66%	-41.09%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-26.93%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-53.20%	-4.58%	-48.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-45.17%	-5.02%	-40.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.68%	4.25%	+6.43%

Volatility

EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L - Volatility Comparison

Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health UCITS ETF Acc USD (EDOC.L) has a higher volatility of 6.66% compared to Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF (XLVP.L) at 4.90%. This indicates that EDOC.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLVP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EDOC.L	XLVP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.66%	4.90%	+1.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.38%	10.72%	+4.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.34%	14.93%	+6.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.49%	14.74%	+12.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.55%	15.76%	+11.79%

EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EDOC.L has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than XLVP.L's 0.14% expense ratio.

Dividends

EDOC.L vs. XLVP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither EDOC.L nor XLVP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EDOC.L and XLVP.L in my portfolio?

EDOC.L and XLVP.L have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EDOC.L or XLVP.L?

On fees, XLVP.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EDOC.L or XLVP.L?

XLVP.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for EDOC.L.

What is the main difference between EDOC.L and XLVP.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI World/Health Care NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for EDOC.L and 0.14% for XLVP.L.