PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L) and Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF (EQQU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FWRG.L achieves a 11.92% return, which is significantly lower than EQQU.L's 19.55% return.


FWRG.L

1D
-0.04%
1M
5.35%
YTD
11.92%
6M
12.40%
1Y
30.08%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

EQQU.L

1D
-0.70%
1M
8.49%
YTD
19.55%
6M
19.04%
1Y
40.23%
3Y*
27.98%
5Y*
17.59%
10Y*
21.19%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
FWRG.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc
11.92%13.84%20.11%8.08%
EQQU.L
Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF
19.55%19.75%26.54%13.28%

Correlation

The correlation between FWRG.L and EQQU.L is 0.79, 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

0.79

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

0.77

The correlation between FWRG.L and EQQU.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FWRG.L
EQQU.L

Technology

29.1%
57.9%

Financial Services

16.4%
0.2%

Industrials

11.0%
2.8%

Consumer Cyclical

9.4%
11.6%

Communication Services

8.9%
14.5%

Healthcare

7.6%
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

5.0%
6.6%

Energy

4.3%
0.5%

Basic Materials

3.9%
1.0%

Utilities

2.6%
1.2%

Real Estate

1.9%
0.0%

Technology

FWRG.L
29.1%
EQQU.L
57.9%

Financial Services

FWRG.L
16.4%
EQQU.L
0.2%

Industrials

FWRG.L
11.0%
EQQU.L
2.8%

Consumer Cyclical

FWRG.L
9.4%
EQQU.L
11.6%

Communication Services

FWRG.L
8.9%
EQQU.L
14.5%

Healthcare

FWRG.L
7.6%
EQQU.L
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

FWRG.L
5.0%
EQQU.L
6.6%

Energy

FWRG.L
4.3%
EQQU.L
0.5%

Basic Materials

FWRG.L
3.9%
EQQU.L
1.0%

Utilities

FWRG.L
2.6%
EQQU.L
1.2%

Real Estate

FWRG.L
1.9%
EQQU.L
0.0%

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

FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FWRG.L
FWRG.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
FWRG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
FWRG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

EQQU.L
EQQU.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
EQQU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQQU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQQU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
EQQU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQQU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L) and Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF (EQQU.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.


FWRG.LEQQU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

1.43

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.20

3.64

+0.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.96

13.04

+3.92

FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FWRG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.91, which is comparable to the EQQU.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FWRG.L and EQQU.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


FWRG.LEQQU.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.91

2.52

+0.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.85

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.51

0.95

+0.56

Drawdowns

FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FWRG.L drawdown since its inception was -18.88%, smaller than the maximum EQQU.L drawdown of -35.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FWRG.L and EQQU.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FWRG.LEQQU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.88%

-35.17%

+16.29%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.14%

-11.00%

+3.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.30%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.17%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.43%

-0.77%

+0.34%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.28%

-6.10%

+3.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.77%

3.08%

-1.31%

Volatility

FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L) is 2.96%, while Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF (EQQU.L) has a volatility of 4.93%. This indicates that FWRG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EQQU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FWRG.LEQQU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.96%

4.93%

-1.97%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.69%

11.88%

-4.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.30%

15.88%

-5.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.40%

20.76%

-8.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.40%

19.97%

-7.57%

FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FWRG.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than EQQU.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

FWRG.L vs. EQQU.L - Dividend Comparison

FWRG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EQQU.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
EQQU.L
Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF
0.23%0.29%0.38%0.39%0.56%0.26%0.11%
FWRG.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FWRG.L and EQQU.L have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, FWRG.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FWRG.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for EQQU.L.

FWRG.L is categorized as Global Equities, while EQQU.L is Nasdaq-100. FWRG.L tracks FTSE All-World Index, while EQQU.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FWRG.L and 0.30% for EQQU.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FWRG.L and EQQU.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