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

Performance

EQQS.L vs. FWRA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco NASDAQ-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (EQQS.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, EQQS.L achieves a 19.72% return, which is significantly higher than FWRA.L's 11.59% return.


EQQS.L

1D
-0.71%
1M
6.80%
YTD
19.72%
6M
18.69%
1Y
39.35%
3Y*
28.21%
5Y*
18.02%
10Y*

FWRA.L

1D
-0.13%
1M
2.52%
YTD
11.59%
6M
12.75%
1Y
28.36%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023
EQQS.L
Invesco NASDAQ-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc
19.72%19.85%26.77%13.30%
FWRA.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
11.59%22.37%18.07%9.23%

Correlation

The correlation between EQQS.L and FWRA.L is 0.88, 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

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023

0.86

The correlation between EQQS.L and FWRA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

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


Sectors
EQQS.L
FWRA.L

Technology

53.7%
29.1%

Communication Services

15.8%
8.9%

Consumer Cyclical

12.2%
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

7.7%
5.0%

Healthcare

4.2%
7.6%

Industrials

3.1%
11.0%

Utilities

1.4%
2.6%

Basic Materials

1.1%
3.9%

Energy

0.6%
4.3%

Financial Services

0.2%
16.4%

Real Estate

0.1%
1.9%

Technology

EQQS.L
53.7%
FWRA.L
29.1%

Communication Services

EQQS.L
15.8%
FWRA.L
8.9%

Consumer Cyclical

EQQS.L
12.2%
FWRA.L
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

EQQS.L
7.7%
FWRA.L
5.0%

Healthcare

EQQS.L
4.2%
FWRA.L
7.6%

Industrials

EQQS.L
3.1%
FWRA.L
11.0%

Utilities

EQQS.L
1.4%
FWRA.L
2.6%

Basic Materials

EQQS.L
1.1%
FWRA.L
3.9%

Energy

EQQS.L
0.6%
FWRA.L
4.3%

Financial Services

EQQS.L
0.2%
FWRA.L
16.4%

Real Estate

EQQS.L
0.1%
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

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

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

EQQS.L
EQQS.L Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
EQQS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQQS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQQS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
EQQS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQQS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco NASDAQ-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (EQQS.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.


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

+0.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.43

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.60

3.27

+0.33

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.17

13.70

-0.53

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

The current EQQS.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is comparable to the FWRA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQQS.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


EQQS.LFWRA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.57

2.32

+0.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.87

1.56

-0.69

Drawdowns

EQQS.L vs. FWRA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQQS.L drawdown since its inception was -34.93%, 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 EQQS.L and FWRA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EQQS.LFWRA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.93%

-16.60%

-18.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.17%

-8.74%

-2.43%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.39%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.93%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.77%

-0.77%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.00%

-1.93%

-7.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.06%

2.09%

+0.97%

Volatility

EQQS.L vs. FWRA.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco NASDAQ-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (EQQS.L) has a higher volatility of 4.79% compared to Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.L) at 3.80%. This indicates that EQQS.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


EQQS.LFWRA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.79%

3.80%

+0.99%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.68%

9.86%

+1.82%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.68%

12.32%

+3.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.37%

13.52%

+8.85%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.49%

13.52%

+8.97%

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

EQQS.L has a 0.20% 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

EQQS.L vs. FWRA.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


EQQS.L and FWRA.L have a correlation of 0.88, 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 0.20% for EQQS.L.

EQQS.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while FWRA.L is Global Equities. EQQS.L tracks NASDAQ - 100 Notional NTR Index, while FWRA.L tracks FTSE All-World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for EQQS.L and 0.15% for FWRA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EQQS.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