EQGB.L vs. IGDA.L
EQGB.L (Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc) and IGDA.L (Invesco Dow Jones Islamic Global Developed Markets UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - EQGB.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index, while IGDA.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones Islamic Market Developed Markets Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EQGB.L returned 27.25%/yr vs 18.37%/yr for IGDA.L. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EQGB.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for IGDA.L.
Performance
EQGB.L vs. IGDA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
EQGB.L is traded in GBp, while IGDA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IGDA.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EQGB.L achieves a 18.86% return, which is significantly higher than IGDA.L's 16.03% return.
EQGB.L
- 1D
- -0.71%
- 1M
- 8.42%
- YTD
- 18.86%
- 6M
- 18.41%
- 1Y
- 39.13%
- 3Y*
- 27.25%
- 5Y*
- 16.35%
- 10Y*
- —
IGDA.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 7.78%
- YTD
- 16.03%
- 6M
- 15.65%
- 1Y
- 36.74%
- 3Y*
- 18.37%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EQGB.L vs. IGDA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EQGB.L Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc | 18.86% | 19.59% | 26.12% | 53.92% | -25.17% |
IGDA.L Invesco Dow Jones Islamic Global Developed Markets UCITS ETF USD Acc | 15.51% | 10.28% | 20.00% | 23.23% | -5.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between EQGB.L and IGDA.L is 0.82, 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 | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 31, 2022 | 0.74 |
The correlation between EQGB.L and IGDA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.
EQGB.L vs. IGDA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Industrials
Utilities
Basic Materials
Energy
Financial Services
Real Estate
Technology
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Communication Services
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Consumer Cyclical
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Consumer Defensive
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Healthcare
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Industrials
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Utilities
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Basic Materials
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Energy
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Financial Services
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
Real Estate
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
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
EQGB.L vs. IGDA.L — Risk / Return Rank
EQGB.L
IGDA.L
EQGB.L vs. IGDA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L) and Invesco Dow Jones Islamic Global Developed Markets UCITS ETF USD Acc (IGDA.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.
| EQGB.L | IGDA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.48 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.44 | 5.08 | -1.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.32 | 18.17 | -5.85 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EQGB.L | IGDA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.46 | 2.68 | -0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.78 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.91 | 0.92 | 0.00 |
Drawdowns
EQGB.L vs. IGDA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EQGB.L drawdown since its inception was -36.77%, which is greater than IGDA.L's maximum drawdown of -22.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQGB.L and IGDA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EQGB.L | IGDA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.77% | -22.43% | -14.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.33% | -7.20% | -4.13% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.76% | -22.43% | -0.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.77% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.81% | -0.43% | -0.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.52% | -3.93% | -3.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.17% | 2.02% | +1.15% |
Volatility
EQGB.L vs. IGDA.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L) has a higher volatility of 4.92% compared to Invesco Dow Jones Islamic Global Developed Markets UCITS ETF USD Acc (IGDA.L) at 4.57%. This indicates that EQGB.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IGDA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EQGB.L | IGDA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.92% | 4.57% | +0.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.88% | 10.31% | +1.57% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.81% | 13.67% | +2.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.95% | 17.32% | +3.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.25% | 17.32% | +3.93% |
EQGB.L vs. IGDA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
EQGB.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than IGDA.L's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
EQGB.L vs. IGDA.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither EQGB.L nor IGDA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EQGB.L Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.04% |
IGDA.L Invesco Dow Jones Islamic Global Developed Markets UCITS ETF USD Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EQGB.L and IGDA.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EQGB.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EQGB.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for IGDA.L.
EQGB.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while IGDA.L is Global Equities. EQGB.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while IGDA.L tracks Dow Jones Islamic Market Developed Markets Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for EQGB.L and 0.40% for IGDA.L.
Find the right allocation for EQGB.L and IGDA.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