PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FING.L vs. XUFB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FING.L vs. XUFB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Global X FinTech UCITS ETF USD Distributing (FING.L) and Xtrackers MSCI USA Banks UCITS ETF 1D (XUFB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FING.L is traded in GBP, while XUFB.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the XUFB.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FING.L achieves a -16.91% return, which is significantly lower than XUFB.L's -4.69% return.


FING.L

1D
-4.14%
1M
-2.65%
YTD
-16.91%
6M
-19.10%
1Y
-19.47%
3Y*
2.99%
5Y*
10Y*

XUFB.L

1D
-1.08%
1M
-2.68%
YTD
-4.69%
6M
0.34%
1Y
22.16%
3Y*
25.29%
5Y*
9.94%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FING.L vs. XUFB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FING.L
Global X FinTech UCITS ETF USD Distributing
-16.91%-12.16%24.04%29.09%-47.26%-12.88%
XUFB.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA Banks UCITS ETF 1D
-4.69%23.40%40.02%5.21%-10.18%-4.18%

Correlation

The correlation between FING.L and XUFB.L is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.40

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

0.50

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2021

0.49

The correlation between FING.L and XUFB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.40 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

FING.L vs. XUFB.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FING.L
XUFB.L

Technology

54.2%

-

Financial Services

40.6%
100.0%

Industrials

3.9%

-

Healthcare

1.4%

-

Consumer Defensive

0.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Energy

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

FING.L
54.2%
XUFB.L

-

Financial Services

FING.L
40.6%
XUFB.L
100.0%

Industrials

FING.L
3.9%
XUFB.L

-

Healthcare

FING.L
1.4%
XUFB.L

-

Consumer Defensive

FING.L
0.0%
XUFB.L

-

Basic Materials

FING.L

-

XUFB.L

-

Communication Services

FING.L

-

XUFB.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

FING.L

-

XUFB.L

-

Energy

FING.L

-

XUFB.L

-

Real Estate

FING.L

-

XUFB.L

-

Utilities

FING.L

-

XUFB.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

FING.L vs. XUFB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FING.L
FING.L Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
FING.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FING.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
FING.L Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
FING.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
FING.L Martin Ratio Rank: 44
Martin Ratio Rank

XUFB.L
XUFB.L Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
XUFB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XUFB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
XUFB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
XUFB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
XUFB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
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.

FING.L vs. XUFB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X FinTech UCITS ETF USD Distributing (FING.L) and Xtrackers MSCI USA Banks UCITS ETF 1D (XUFB.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.


FING.LXUFB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.87

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.89

1.20

-0.31

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.53

1.54

-2.07

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.00

4.09

-5.09

FING.L vs. XUFB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FING.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.75, which is lower than the XUFB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FING.L and XUFB.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


FING.LXUFB.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.75

1.12

-1.87

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.42

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.45

0.41

-0.86

Drawdowns

FING.L vs. XUFB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FING.L drawdown since its inception was -56.45%, which is greater than XUFB.L's maximum drawdown of -41.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FING.L and XUFB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FING.LXUFB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.45%

-41.84%

-14.61%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-36.51%

-14.33%

-22.18%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-38.02%

-27.91%

-10.11%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-46.60%

-7.73%

-38.87%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-39.72%

-12.34%

-27.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

19.42%

5.40%

+14.02%

Volatility

FING.L vs. XUFB.L - Volatility Comparison

Global X FinTech UCITS ETF USD Distributing (FING.L) has a higher volatility of 7.42% compared to Xtrackers MSCI USA Banks UCITS ETF 1D (XUFB.L) at 4.91%. This indicates that FING.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XUFB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FING.LXUFB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.42%

4.91%

+2.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.97%

15.18%

+4.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.07%

19.73%

+6.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.65%

24.07%

+4.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.65%

28.81%

-0.16%

FING.L vs. XUFB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FING.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than XUFB.L's 0.12% expense ratio.


Dividends

FING.L vs. XUFB.L - Dividend Comparison

FING.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XUFB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
FING.L
Global X FinTech UCITS ETF USD Distributing
0.00%0.00%0.21%0.08%0.00%0.00%
XUFB.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA Banks UCITS ETF 1D
1.84%1.71%1.92%2.54%3.43%1.76%

Frequently Asked Questions


FING.L and XUFB.L have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XUFB.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XUFB.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FING.L.

FING.L tracks Indxx Global Fintech Thematic, while XUFB.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Global X and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FING.L and 0.12% for XUFB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FING.L and XUFB.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