PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco NASDAQ Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc (EQQJ.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EQQJ.L achieves a 23.07% return, which is significantly higher than FWRA.L's 11.59% return.


EQQJ.L

1D
0.43%
1M
11.12%
YTD
23.07%
6M
23.69%
1Y
46.29%
3Y*
22.37%
5Y*
7.63%
10Y*

FWRA.L

1D
-0.13%
1M
4.28%
YTD
11.59%
6M
13.01%
1Y
28.82%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
EQQJ.L
Invesco NASDAQ Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc
23.07%20.32%14.94%5.04%
FWRA.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
11.59%22.37%18.07%9.23%

Correlation

The correlation between EQQJ.L and FWRA.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 (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023

0.83

The correlation between EQQJ.L and FWRA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EQQJ.L
FWRA.L

Technology

38.3%
29.1%

Healthcare

19.4%
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

12.7%
9.4%

Industrials

11.3%
11.0%

Communication Services

7.4%
8.9%

Utilities

2.8%
2.6%

Basic Materials

2.7%
3.9%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
5.0%

Financial Services

1.7%
16.4%

Energy

1.2%
4.3%

Real Estate

-

1.9%

Technology

EQQJ.L
38.3%
FWRA.L
29.1%

Healthcare

EQQJ.L
19.4%
FWRA.L
7.6%

Consumer Cyclical

EQQJ.L
12.7%
FWRA.L
9.4%

Industrials

EQQJ.L
11.3%
FWRA.L
11.0%

Communication Services

EQQJ.L
7.4%
FWRA.L
8.9%

Utilities

EQQJ.L
2.8%
FWRA.L
2.6%

Basic Materials

EQQJ.L
2.7%
FWRA.L
3.9%

Consumer Defensive

EQQJ.L
2.6%
FWRA.L
5.0%

Financial Services

EQQJ.L
1.7%
FWRA.L
16.4%

Energy

EQQJ.L
1.2%
FWRA.L
4.3%

Real Estate

EQQJ.L

-

FWRA.L
1.9%

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

EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EQQJ.L
EQQJ.L Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
EQQJ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQQJ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQQJ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
EQQJ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQQJ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

FWRA.L
FWRA.L Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
FWRA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FWRA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
FWRA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
FWRA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
FWRA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco NASDAQ Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc (EQQJ.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.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.


EQQJ.LFWRA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.43

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.13

3.27

+0.86

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.96

13.70

+3.26

EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQQJ.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is comparable to the FWRA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQQJ.L and FWRA.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EQQJ.LFWRA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.70

2.32

+0.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.36

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.32

1.56

-1.24

Drawdowns

EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQQJ.L drawdown since its inception was -38.51%, which is greater than FWRA.L's maximum drawdown of -16.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQQJ.L and FWRA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EQQJ.LFWRA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.51%

-16.60%

-21.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.15%

-8.74%

-2.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.20%

-0.77%

+0.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.71%

-1.93%

-14.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.72%

2.09%

+0.63%

Volatility

EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco NASDAQ Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc (EQQJ.L) has a higher volatility of 6.61% compared to Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.L) at 3.80%. This indicates that EQQJ.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FWRA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EQQJ.LFWRA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.61%

3.80%

+2.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.70%

9.86%

+3.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.09%

12.32%

+4.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.18%

13.52%

+7.66%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.27%

13.52%

+7.75%

EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EQQJ.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than FWRA.L's 0.15% 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

EQQJ.L vs. FWRA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither EQQJ.L nor FWRA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


EQQJ.L and FWRA.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, FWRA.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FWRA.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for EQQJ.L.

EQQJ.L is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while FWRA.L is Global Equities. EQQJ.L tracks Nasdaq Next Generation 100 Index, while FWRA.L tracks FTSE All-World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EQQJ.L and 0.15% for FWRA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EQQJ.L and FWRA.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