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

Performance

FCSG.L vs. HIWS.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 HSBC MSCI World Islamic Screened UCITS ETF USD Acc (HIWS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FCSG.L is traded in GBp, while HIWS.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the HIWS.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 HIWS.L's 21.23% 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*

HIWS.L

1D
-0.28%
1M
11.29%
YTD
21.23%
6M
21.33%
1Y
40.60%
3Y*
17.16%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
FCSG.L
First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation
-1.69%3.93%11.42%6.17%-2.65%
HIWS.L
HSBC MSCI World Islamic Screened UCITS ETF USD Acc
21.23%13.05%8.10%19.20%-3.08%

Correlation

The correlation between FCSG.L and HIWS.L is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.26

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

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 2, 2022

0.51

Over the past year, the correlation between FCSG.L and HIWS.L has dropped to 0.26 - well below their long-term average of 0.51, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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. HIWS.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

HIWS.L
HIWS.L Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
HIWS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HIWS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
HIWS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
HIWS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
HIWS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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. HIWS.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 HSBC MSCI World Islamic Screened UCITS ETF USD Acc (HIWS.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.LHIWS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-4.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.01

1.55

-0.55

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.01

5.52

-5.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.04

19.89

-19.93

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

The current FCSG.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.01, which is lower than the HIWS.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCSG.L and HIWS.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.LHIWS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.01

3.09

-3.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.55

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.67

1.21

-0.53

Drawdowns

FCSG.L vs. HIWS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCSG.L drawdown since its inception was -11.39%, smaller than the maximum HIWS.L drawdown of -21.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCSG.L and HIWS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCSG.LHIWS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.39%

-21.14%

+9.75%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.80%

-7.33%

-0.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.70%

-21.14%

+11.44%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-11.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.95%

-0.28%

-4.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.65%

-2.78%

+0.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.12%

2.04%

+1.08%

Volatility

FCSG.L vs. HIWS.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 HSBC MSCI World Islamic Screened UCITS ETF USD Acc (HIWS.L) has a volatility of 4.48%. This indicates that FCSG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HIWS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FCSG.LHIWS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.83%

4.48%

-1.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.95%

10.08%

-3.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.82%

13.06%

-4.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.70%

13.72%

-3.02%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.67%

13.72%

-3.05%

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

FCSG.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than HIWS.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

FCSG.L vs. HIWS.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FCSG.L and HIWS.L have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HIWS.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HIWS.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FCSG.L.

FCSG.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while HIWS.L tracks MSCI World Islamic Universal Screened Select Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for FCSG.L and 0.30% for HIWS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FCSG.L and HIWS.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