PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EQQS.L vs. R1GR.AS
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

EQQS.L vs. R1GR.AS - 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 iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (R1GR.AS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

EQQS.L vs. R1GR.AS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
EQQS.L
Invesco NASDAQ-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc
-5.09%19.85%26.77%7.69%
R1GR.AS
iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF
-9.53%17.57%35.07%6.55%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EQQS.L achieves a -5.09% return, which is significantly higher than R1GR.AS's -9.53% return.


EQQS.L

1D
3.38%
1M
-3.03%
YTD
-5.09%
6M
-2.18%
1Y
24.74%
3Y*
23.31%
5Y*
10Y*

R1GR.AS

1D
2.96%
1M
-3.80%
YTD
-9.53%
6M
-7.97%
1Y
19.07%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


EQQS.L vs. R1GR.AS - Expense Ratio Comparison

EQQS.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than R1GR.AS's 0.18% 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%.


Return for Risk

EQQS.L vs. R1GR.AS — 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: 7070
Overall Rank
EQQS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQQS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQQS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
EQQS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQQS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank

R1GR.AS
R1GR.AS Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
R1GR.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
R1GR.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
R1GR.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
R1GR.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
R1GR.AS Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
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. R1GR.AS - 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 iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (R1GR.AS). 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.LR1GR.ASDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.26

0.96

+0.30

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.87

1.48

+0.39

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.19

+0.06

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.15

1.92

+0.23

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

7.86

6.72

+1.14

EQQS.L vs. R1GR.AS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQQS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.26, which is higher than the R1GR.AS Sharpe Ratio of 0.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQQS.L and R1GR.AS, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EQQS.LR1GR.ASDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.26

0.96

+0.30

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.63

0.99

-0.36

Correlation

The correlation between EQQS.L and R1GR.AS is 0.89, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

EQQS.L vs. R1GR.AS - Dividend Comparison

Neither EQQS.L nor R1GR.AS has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

EQQS.L vs. R1GR.AS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQQS.L drawdown since its inception was -34.93%, which is greater than R1GR.AS's maximum drawdown of -23.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQQS.L and R1GR.AS.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


EQQS.LR1GR.ASDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.93%

-23.09%

-11.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.93%

-15.71%

+3.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.52%

-12.16%

+4.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.30%

-3.37%

-5.93%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.06%

4.49%

-1.43%

Volatility

EQQS.L vs. R1GR.AS - Volatility Comparison

Invesco NASDAQ-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (EQQS.L) has a higher volatility of 6.06% compared to iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (R1GR.AS) at 5.74%. This indicates that EQQS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than R1GR.AS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


EQQS.LR1GR.ASDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.06%

5.74%

+0.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.94%

11.64%

+0.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.63%

19.65%

-0.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.63%

19.03%

+3.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.63%

19.03%

+3.60%