ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

ESPS.L (Invesco MSCI Pacific Ex Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc) and RQFI.L (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D) are both exchange-traded funds - ESPS.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD, while RQFI.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ESPS.L returned 6.41%/yr vs -0.10%/yr for RQFI.L. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ESPS.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for RQFI.L.

Performance

ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Pacific Ex Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESPS.L) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESPS.L achieves a 9.45% return, which is significantly higher than RQFI.L's 6.78% return.

ESPS.L

• 1D: 1.16%
• 1M: 2.47%
• 6M: 7.70%
• YTD: 9.45%
• 1Y: 13.82%
• 3Y*: 10.70%
• 5Y*: 6.41%
• 10Y*: —

RQFI.L

• 1D: -0.61%
• 1M: -2.49%
• 6M: 4.42%
• YTD: 6.78%
• 1Y: 27.80%
• 3Y*: 9.85%
• 5Y*: -0.10%
• 10Y*: 4.84%

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

ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ESPS.L Invesco MSCI Pacific Ex Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc	9.45%	10.90%	7.65%	-0.04%	3.67%	7,446.61%
RQFI.L Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D	6.78%	18.47%	15.24%	-18.06%	-18.37%	-7.59%

Correlation

The correlation between ESPS.L and RQFI.L is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.35
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 8, 2021	0.39

ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ESPS.L	RQFI.L
Financial Services	50.3%	20.4%
Basic Materials	11.8%	10.7%
Real Estate	7.8%	0.5%
Industrials	7.2%	16.6%
Consumer Cyclical	7.1%	6.7%
Healthcare	4.1%	4.9%
Energy	3.0%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.7%	7.4%
Communication Services	2.6%	0.8%
Utilities	2.2%	3.0%
Technology	1.4%	26.3%

Return for Risk

ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESPS.L

ESPS.L Risk / Return Rank: 40
ESPS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
ESPS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
ESPS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 40
ESPS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
ESPS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 36

RQFI.L

RQFI.L Risk / Return Rank: 66
RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
RQFI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
RQFI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 58
RQFI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
RQFI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Pacific Ex Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESPS.L) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.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.

	ESPS.L	RQFI.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.22	1.65	-0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.81	2.26	-0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.29	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.80	3.40	-1.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.58	10.50	-5.92

ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESPS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is comparable to the RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESPS.L and RQFI.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

ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESPS.L drawdown since its inception was -17.76%, smaller than the maximum RQFI.L drawdown of -47.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESPS.L and RQFI.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ESPS.L	RQFI.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.76%	-47.55%	+29.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.52%	-8.13%	+0.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.76%	-25.09%	+7.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.76%	-41.72%	+23.96%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.36%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.45%	-14.24%	+12.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.73%	-24.67%	+19.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.97%	2.64%	+0.33%

Volatility

ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Pacific Ex Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESPS.L) is 2.47%, while Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) has a volatility of 7.94%. This indicates that ESPS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RQFI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ESPS.L	RQFI.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.47%	7.94%	-5.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.79%	12.27%	-3.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.12%	16.79%	-5.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.64%	20.87%	-7.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3,091.86%	21.72%	+3,070.14%

ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESPS.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than RQFI.L's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

ESPS.L vs. RQFI.L - Dividend Comparison

ESPS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RQFI.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.48%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ESPS.L Invesco MSCI Pacific Ex Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RQFI.L Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D	1.48%	1.77%	1.46%	1.99%	1.88%	0.93%	1.26%	0.76%	2.23%	1.92%	1.69%	0.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ESPS.L and RQFI.L in my portfolio?

ESPS.L and RQFI.L have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ESPS.L or RQFI.L?

On fees, ESPS.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, ESPS.L or RQFI.L?

ESPS.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for RQFI.L.

What is the main difference between ESPS.L and RQFI.L?

ESPS.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while RQFI.L is China Equities. ESPS.L tracks MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD, while RQFI.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ESPS.L and 0.65% for RQFI.L.