FWRG.L vs. HMEF.L

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FWRG.L (Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc) and HMEF.L (HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD) are both exchange-traded funds - FWRG.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the FTSE All-World Index, while HMEF.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FWRG.L returned 29.06% vs 44.70% for HMEF.L. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.

Performance

FWRG.L vs. HMEF.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 HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FWRG.L achieves a 12.05% return, which is significantly lower than HMEF.L's 23.96% return.

FWRG.L

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 1.79%
• YTD: 12.05%
• 6M: 12.44%
• 1Y: 29.06%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HMEF.L

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 2.35%
• YTD: 23.96%
• 6M: 25.14%
• 1Y: 44.70%
• 3Y*: 23.06%
• 5Y*: 6.94%
• 10Y*: 46.68%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FWRG.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc	12.05%	13.84%	20.11%	8,531.38%
HMEF.L HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD	23.96%	33.96%	7.26%	4.63%

Correlation

The correlation between FWRG.L and HMEF.L is 0.63, 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	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2023	0.53

The correlation between FWRG.L and HMEF.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (all time) to 0.63 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors	FWRG.L	HMEF.L
Technology	32.2%	44.9%
Financial Services	16.4%	18.2%
Industrials	10.7%	6.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.8%	7.8%
Communication Services	8.2%	6.0%
Healthcare	7.4%	2.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.7%	2.5%
Basic Materials	3.8%	5.7%
Energy	3.7%	3.2%
Utilities	2.4%	1.8%
Real Estate	1.7%	1.0%

Return for Risk

FWRG.L vs. HMEF.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: 88
FWRG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
FWRG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
FWRG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
FWRG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
FWRG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

HMEF.L

HMEF.L Risk / Return Rank: 87
HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
HMEF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
HMEF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
HMEF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
HMEF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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. HMEF.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 HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	FWRG.L	HMEF.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.70	2.20	+0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.74	2.88	+0.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.41	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.05	3.40	+0.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.98	12.05	+3.93

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

The current FWRG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is comparable to the HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FWRG.L and HMEF.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.

Drawdowns

FWRG.L vs. HMEF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FWRG.L drawdown since its inception was -18.87%, smaller than the maximum HMEF.L drawdown of -39.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FWRG.L and HMEF.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FWRG.L	HMEF.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.87%	-39.89%	+21.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.14%	-13.08%	+5.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.87%	-16.21%	-2.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-36.85%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.07%	-5.00%	+3.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.24%	-11.07%	+8.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.81%	3.70%	-1.89%

Volatility

FWRG.L vs. HMEF.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L) is 3.62%, while HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L) has a volatility of 9.10%. This indicates that FWRG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HMEF.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FWRG.L	HMEF.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.62%	9.10%	-5.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.25%	18.13%	-9.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.72%	20.37%	-9.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4,460.73%	18.97%	+4,441.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4,460.73%	141.96%	+4,318.77%

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

Both FWRG.L and HMEF.L have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FWRG.L vs. HMEF.L - Dividend Comparison

FWRG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HMEF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FWRG.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HMEF.L HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD	1.61%	1.98%	2.43%	2.58%	2.99%	2.01%	1.66%	2.11%	2.14%	37.43%	168.62%	225.12%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FWRG.L and HMEF.L in my portfolio?

FWRG.L and HMEF.L have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FWRG.L or HMEF.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FWRG.L or HMEF.L?

FWRG.L and HMEF.L have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

What is the main difference between FWRG.L and HMEF.L?

FWRG.L is categorized as Global Equities, while HMEF.L is Emerging Markets Equities. FWRG.L tracks FTSE All-World Index, while HMEF.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and HSBC.