EQJS.L vs. XLKQ.L
EQJS.L (Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc) and XLKQ.L (Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - EQJS.L is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Next Generation 100 Index, while XLKQ.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the S&P Select Sector Capped 20% Technology Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EQJS.L returned 8.68%/yr vs 27.18%/yr for XLKQ.L. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EQJS.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLKQ.L.
Performance
EQJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EQJS.L achieves a 22.58% return, which is significantly lower than XLKQ.L's 26.63% return.
EQJS.L
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 13.65%
- YTD
- 22.58%
- 6M
- 23.09%
- 1Y
- 47.91%
- 3Y*
- 19.20%
- 5Y*
- 8.68%
- 10Y*
- —
XLKQ.L
- 1D
- -0.62%
- 1M
- 19.02%
- YTD
- 26.63%
- 6M
- 25.08%
- 1Y
- 58.35%
- 3Y*
- 34.40%
- 5Y*
- 27.18%
- 10Y*
- 27.64%
EQJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EQJS.L Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc | 22.58% | 12.27% | 16.78% | 8.31% | -20.39% | 10.77% |
XLKQ.L Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc | 26.63% | 15.76% | 44.03% | 51.84% | -20.58% | 36.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between EQJS.L and XLKQ.L is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 29, 2021 | 0.70 |
The correlation between EQJS.L and XLKQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.
EQJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
Technology
Healthcare
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Industrials
Communication Services
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
Healthcare
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
-
Consumer Cyclical
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
-
Industrials
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
Communication Services
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
-
Utilities
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
-
Basic Materials
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
-
Consumer Defensive
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
-
Financial Services
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
Energy
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
-
Real Estate
EQJS.L
-
XLKQ.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
EQJS.L vs. XLKQ.L — Risk / Return Rank
EQJS.L
XLKQ.L
EQJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc (EQJS.L) and Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.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.
| EQJS.L | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 1.50 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.07 | 3.46 | +1.61 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.34 | 9.02 | +8.32 |
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
| EQJS.L | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.06 | 3.05 | +0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 | 1.24 | -0.78 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 1.35 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.45 | 1.34 | -0.89 |
Drawdowns
EQJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EQJS.L drawdown since its inception was -32.10%, which is greater than XLKQ.L's maximum drawdown of -28.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQJS.L and XLKQ.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EQJS.L | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.10% | -28.74% | -3.36% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.40% | -16.76% | +7.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.83% | -28.74% | +3.91% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.10% | -28.74% | -3.36% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -28.74% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.36% | -0.62% | +0.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.46% | -5.04% | -8.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.75% | 6.45% | -3.70% |
Volatility
EQJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc (EQJS.L) and Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.L) have volatilities of 5.92% and 6.18%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EQJS.L | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.92% | 6.18% | -0.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.07% | 14.08% | -2.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.65% | 19.14% | -3.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.05% | 22.02% | -2.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.23% | 21.64% | -2.41% |
EQJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
EQJS.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XLKQ.L's 0.14% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
EQJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither EQJS.L nor XLKQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
EQJS.L and XLKQ.L have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XLKQ.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLKQ.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for EQJS.L.
EQJS.L is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while XLKQ.L is Technology Equities. EQJS.L tracks Nasdaq Next Generation 100 Index, while XLKQ.L tracks S&P Select Sector Capped 20% Technology Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EQJS.L and 0.14% for XLKQ.L.
Find the right allocation for EQJS.L and XLKQ.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