PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.L) and Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLKS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FWRA.L achieves a 11.59% return, which is significantly lower than XLKS.L's 23.53% return.


FWRA.L

1D
-0.13%
1M
4.28%
YTD
11.59%
6M
13.01%
1Y
28.82%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

XLKS.L

1D
-2.32%
1M
13.24%
YTD
23.53%
6M
23.08%
1Y
52.93%
3Y*
36.69%
5Y*
25.25%
10Y*
26.28%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
FWRA.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
11.59%22.37%18.07%9.23%
XLKS.L
Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc
23.53%24.23%41.72%14.19%

Correlation

The correlation between FWRA.L and XLKS.L is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023

0.78

The correlation between FWRA.L and XLKS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FWRA.L
XLKS.L

Technology

29.1%
91.2%

Financial Services

16.4%
7.3%

Industrials

11.0%
1.5%

Consumer Cyclical

9.4%

-

Communication Services

8.9%

-

Healthcare

7.6%

-

Consumer Defensive

5.0%

-

Energy

4.3%

-

Basic Materials

3.9%

-

Utilities

2.6%

-

Real Estate

1.9%

-

Technology

FWRA.L
29.1%
XLKS.L
91.2%

Financial Services

FWRA.L
16.4%
XLKS.L
7.3%

Industrials

FWRA.L
11.0%
XLKS.L
1.5%

Consumer Cyclical

FWRA.L
9.4%
XLKS.L

-

Communication Services

FWRA.L
8.9%
XLKS.L

-

Healthcare

FWRA.L
7.6%
XLKS.L

-

Consumer Defensive

FWRA.L
5.0%
XLKS.L

-

Energy

FWRA.L
4.3%
XLKS.L

-

Basic Materials

FWRA.L
3.9%
XLKS.L

-

Utilities

FWRA.L
2.6%
XLKS.L

-

Real Estate

FWRA.L
1.9%
XLKS.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

FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FWRA.L
FWRA.L Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
FWRA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FWRA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
FWRA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
FWRA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
FWRA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

XLKS.L
XLKS.L Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
XLKS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLKS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLKS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
XLKS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLKS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
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.

FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.L) and Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLKS.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.


FWRA.LXLKS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.42

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.27

3.10

+0.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.70

9.28

+4.43

FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FWRA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is comparable to the XLKS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FWRA.L and XLKS.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


FWRA.LXLKS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.32

2.61

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.06

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.56

1.04

+0.52

Drawdowns

FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FWRA.L drawdown since its inception was -16.60%, smaller than the maximum XLKS.L drawdown of -34.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FWRA.L and XLKS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FWRA.LXLKS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.60%

-34.26%

+17.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.74%

-16.99%

+8.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.26%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.77%

-3.15%

+2.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.93%

-5.09%

+3.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.09%

5.69%

-3.60%

Volatility

FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.L) is 3.80%, while Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLKS.L) has a volatility of 7.45%. This indicates that FWRA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLKS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FWRA.LXLKS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.80%

7.45%

-3.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.86%

15.54%

-5.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.32%

20.19%

-7.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.52%

23.80%

-10.28%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.52%

22.04%

-8.52%

FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FWRA.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than XLKS.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

FWRA.L vs. XLKS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FWRA.L nor XLKS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FWRA.L and XLKS.L have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XLKS.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XLKS.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for FWRA.L.

FWRA.L is categorized as Global Equities, while XLKS.L is Technology Equities. FWRA.L tracks FTSE All-World Index, while XLKS.L tracks S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Technology Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FWRA.L and 0.14% for XLKS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FWRA.L and XLKS.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