ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

ESJS.L (Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc) and EQGB.L (Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - ESJS.L is a Japan Equities fund tracking the TOPIX TR JPY, while EQGB.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ESJS.L returned 9.73%/yr vs 13.39%/yr for EQGB.L. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ESJS.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for EQGB.L.

Performance

ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESJS.L) and Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESJS.L achieves a 14.30% return, which is significantly higher than EQGB.L's 11.82% return.

ESJS.L

• 1D: -0.97%
• 1M: -3.72%
• 6M: 7.59%
• YTD: 14.30%
• 1Y: 32.76%
• 3Y*: 16.70%
• 5Y*: 9.73%
• 10Y*: —

EQGB.L

• 1D: -2.31%
• 1M: -5.07%
• 6M: 11.25%
• YTD: 11.82%
• 1Y: 23.30%
• 3Y*: 22.04%
• 5Y*: 13.39%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ESJS.L Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc	14.30%	18.47%	9.64%	12.97%	-7.90%	-27.12%
EQGB.L Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc	11.82%	19.59%	26.12%	53.92%	-35.07%	27.20%

Correlation

The correlation between ESJS.L and EQGB.L is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 8, 2021	0.46

The correlation between ESJS.L and EQGB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ESJS.L	EQGB.L
Technology	25.5%	60.2%
Industrials	23.2%	3.6%
Financial Services	18.6%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	10.6%
Communication Services	9.1%	12.8%
Healthcare	6.0%	3.6%
Basic Materials	2.5%	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	2.0%	6.3%
Real Estate	1.8%	0.1%
Energy	0.7%	0.4%
Utilities	0.4%	1.1%

Return for Risk

ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESJS.L

ESJS.L Risk / Return Rank: 74
ESJS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
ESJS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
ESJS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 72
ESJS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
ESJS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 72

EQGB.L

EQGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 48
EQGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
EQGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
EQGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 45
EQGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
EQGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESJS.L) and Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ESJS.L	EQGB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	1.33	+0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	1.94	+0.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.24	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.21	2.05	+1.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.71	6.78	+2.93

ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESJS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is higher than the EQGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESJS.L and EQGB.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.

Drawdowns

ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESJS.L drawdown since its inception was -37.23%, roughly equal to the maximum EQGB.L drawdown of -36.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESJS.L and EQGB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ESJS.L	EQGB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.23%	-36.77%	-0.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.62%	-11.33%	+0.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.59%	-22.76%	+8.17%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.38%	-36.77%	+17.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.10%	-6.69%	+0.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.66%	-7.40%	-14.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.52%	3.43%	+0.09%

Volatility

ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESJS.L) has a higher volatility of 6.75% compared to Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L) at 6.24%. This indicates that ESJS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EQGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ESJS.L	EQGB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.75%	6.24%	+0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.89%	13.94%	+1.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.35%	17.48%	+1.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.27%	21.22%	-4.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.00%	21.27%	-1.27%

ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESJS.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than EQGB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

ESJS.L vs. EQGB.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ESJS.L nor EQGB.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%	4.16%
ESJS.L Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ESJS.L and EQGB.L in my portfolio?

ESJS.L and EQGB.L have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ESJS.L or EQGB.L?

On fees, ESJS.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ESJS.L or EQGB.L?

ESJS.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for EQGB.L.

What is the main difference between ESJS.L and EQGB.L?

ESJS.L is categorized as Japan Equities, while EQGB.L is Nasdaq-100. ESJS.L tracks TOPIX TR JPY, while EQGB.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ESJS.L and 0.35% for EQGB.L.