PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ESJS.L vs. XLKQ.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ESJS.L vs. XLKQ.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 Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with ESJS.L having a 14.30% return and XLKQ.L slightly higher at 14.80%.


ESJS.L

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

XLKQ.L

1D
-1.27%
1M
-4.52%
6M
15.38%
YTD
14.80%
1Y
27.84%
3Y*
29.05%
5Y*
22.16%
10Y*
24.67%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
ESJS.L
Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc
14.30%18.47%9.64%12.97%-7.90%-27.12%
XLKQ.L
Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc
14.80%15.76%44.03%51.84%-20.58%35.52%

Correlation

The correlation between ESJS.L and XLKQ.L is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.44

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.41

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 8, 2021

0.46

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


Sectors
ESJS.L
XLKQ.L

Technology

25.5%
91.2%

Industrials

23.2%
1.5%

Financial Services

18.6%
7.3%

Consumer Cyclical

10.2%

-

Communication Services

9.1%

-

Healthcare

6.0%

-

Basic Materials

2.5%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.0%

-

Real Estate

1.8%

-

Energy

0.7%

-

Utilities

0.4%

-

Technology

ESJS.L
25.5%
XLKQ.L
91.2%

Industrials

ESJS.L
23.2%
XLKQ.L
1.5%

Financial Services

ESJS.L
18.6%
XLKQ.L
7.3%

Consumer Cyclical

ESJS.L
10.2%
XLKQ.L

-

Communication Services

ESJS.L
9.1%
XLKQ.L

-

Healthcare

ESJS.L
6.0%
XLKQ.L

-

Basic Materials

ESJS.L
2.5%
XLKQ.L

-

Consumer Defensive

ESJS.L
2.0%
XLKQ.L

-

Real Estate

ESJS.L
1.8%
XLKQ.L

-

Energy

ESJS.L
0.7%
XLKQ.L

-

Utilities

ESJS.L
0.4%
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

ESJS.L vs. XLKQ.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: 7474
Overall Rank
ESJS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESJS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESJS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
ESJS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESJS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

XLKQ.L
XLKQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
XLKQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLKQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLKQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
XLKQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLKQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
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.

ESJS.L vs. XLKQ.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 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.

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.LXLKQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.23

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.21

1.65

+1.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.71

4.02

+5.70

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

The current ESJS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is higher than the XLKQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESJS.L and XLKQ.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...

Drawdowns

ESJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESJS.L drawdown since its inception was -37.23%, roughly equal to the maximum XLKQ.L drawdown of -38.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESJS.L and XLKQ.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ESJS.LXLKQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.23%

-38.43%

+1.20%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.62%

-16.76%

+6.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.59%

-28.74%

+14.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.38%

-28.74%

+9.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.10%

-9.90%

+3.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.66%

-8.07%

-13.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.52%

6.92%

-3.40%

Volatility

ESJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESJS.L) is 6.75%, while Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.L) has a volatility of 7.26%. This indicates that ESJS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLKQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ESJS.LXLKQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.75%

7.26%

-0.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.89%

16.42%

-0.53%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.35%

21.12%

-1.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.27%

26.43%

-10.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.00%

23.45%

-3.45%

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

ESJS.L has a 0.19% 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

ESJS.L vs. XLKQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ESJS.L nor XLKQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


ESJS.L and XLKQ.L have a correlation of 0.44, 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 0.19% for ESJS.L.

ESJS.L is categorized as Japan Equities, while XLKQ.L is Technology Equities. ESJS.L tracks TOPIX TR JPY, while XLKQ.L tracks S&P Select Sector Capped 20% Technology Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ESJS.L and 0.14% for XLKQ.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ESJS.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