PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation (FCSG.L) and First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation (CIBR.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FCSG.L is traded in GBp, while CIBR.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CIBR.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCSG.L achieves a -1.69% return, which is significantly lower than CIBR.L's 25.53% return.


FCSG.L

1D
0.72%
1M
1.84%
YTD
-1.69%
6M
-1.06%
1Y
-0.11%
3Y*
6.29%
5Y*
5.92%
10Y*

CIBR.L

1D
-2.60%
1M
29.75%
YTD
25.53%
6M
20.36%
1Y
22.63%
3Y*
22.15%
5Y*
15.81%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FCSG.L
First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation
-1.69%3.93%11.42%6.17%-3.68%23.55%
CIBR.L
First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation
25.53%-0.09%21.03%33.79%-18.91%30.04%

Correlation

The correlation between FCSG.L and CIBR.L is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.11

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

0.33

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

0.39

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 11, 2021

0.39

Over the past year, the correlation between FCSG.L and CIBR.L has dropped to 0.11 - well below their long-term average of 0.39, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FCSG.L
CIBR.L

Financial Services

29.4%

-

Consumer Defensive

20.9%

-

Industrials

17.7%
1.8%

Technology

14.0%
95.6%

Healthcare

5.7%

-

Basic Materials

4.6%

-

Consumer Cyclical

4.0%

-

Communication Services

3.8%
2.6%

Energy

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

FCSG.L
29.4%
CIBR.L

-

Consumer Defensive

FCSG.L
20.9%
CIBR.L

-

Industrials

FCSG.L
17.7%
CIBR.L
1.8%

Technology

FCSG.L
14.0%
CIBR.L
95.6%

Healthcare

FCSG.L
5.7%
CIBR.L

-

Basic Materials

FCSG.L
4.6%
CIBR.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

FCSG.L
4.0%
CIBR.L

-

Communication Services

FCSG.L
3.8%
CIBR.L
2.6%

Energy

FCSG.L

-

CIBR.L

-

Real Estate

FCSG.L

-

CIBR.L

-

Utilities

FCSG.L

-

CIBR.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

FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCSG.L
FCSG.L Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
FCSG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCSG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCSG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
FCSG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCSG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank

CIBR.L
CIBR.L Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
CIBR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIBR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIBR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
CIBR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIBR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
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.

FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation (FCSG.L) and First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation (CIBR.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.


FCSG.LCIBR.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.89

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.01

1.18

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.01

0.93

-0.94

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.04

2.11

-2.15

FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCSG.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.01, which is lower than the CIBR.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCSG.L and CIBR.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


FCSG.LCIBR.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.01

0.88

-0.89

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.55

0.67

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.67

0.69

-0.02

Drawdowns

FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCSG.L drawdown since its inception was -11.39%, smaller than the maximum CIBR.L drawdown of -26.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCSG.L and CIBR.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCSG.LCIBR.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.39%

-26.65%

+15.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.80%

-24.29%

+16.49%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.70%

-25.48%

+15.78%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-11.39%

-26.65%

+15.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.95%

-3.05%

-1.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.65%

-9.33%

+6.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.12%

10.68%

-7.56%

Volatility

FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation (FCSG.L) is 2.83%, while First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation (CIBR.L) has a volatility of 12.21%. This indicates that FCSG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CIBR.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FCSG.LCIBR.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.83%

12.21%

-9.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.95%

22.57%

-15.62%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.82%

25.58%

-16.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.70%

23.70%

-13.00%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.67%

23.78%

-13.11%

FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCSG.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CIBR.L's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

FCSG.L vs. CIBR.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FCSG.L nor CIBR.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FCSG.L and CIBR.L have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CIBR.L is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CIBR.L is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FCSG.L.

FCSG.L is categorized as Global Equities, while CIBR.L is Technology Equities. FCSG.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while CIBR.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for FCSG.L and 0.60% for CIBR.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FCSG.L and CIBR.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