FWRG.L vs. XLKQ.L
FWRG.L (Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc) and XLKQ.L (Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - FWRG.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the FTSE All-World Index, while XLKQ.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the S&P Select Sector Capped 20% Technology Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FWRG.L returned 30.35% vs 58.77% for XLKQ.L. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FWRG.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLKQ.L.
Performance
FWRG.L vs. XLKQ.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
FWRG.L is traded in USD, while XLKQ.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the XLKQ.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 11.97% return, which is significantly lower than XLKQ.L's 27.51% return.
FWRG.L
- 1D
- -0.38%
- 1M
- 5.96%
- YTD
- 11.97%
- 6M
- 12.52%
- 1Y
- 30.35%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XLKQ.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 18.87%
- YTD
- 27.51%
- 6M
- 26.93%
- 1Y
- 58.77%
- 3Y*
- 38.25%
- 5Y*
- 26.08%
- 10Y*
- 26.77%
FWRG.L vs. XLKQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FWRG.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc | 11.97% | 13.84% | 20.11% | 8.08% |
XLKQ.L Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc | 26.33% | 24.49% | 41.63% | 13.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between FWRG.L and XLKQ.L is 0.75, 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 | 0.75 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023 | 0.72 |
The correlation between FWRG.L and XLKQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.
FWRG.L vs. XLKQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
Healthcare
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
Financial Services
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
Industrials
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
Consumer Cyclical
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
-
Communication Services
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
-
Healthcare
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
-
Consumer Defensive
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
-
Energy
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
-
Basic Materials
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
-
Utilities
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
-
Real Estate
FWRG.L
XLKQ.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
FWRG.L vs. XLKQ.L — Risk / Return Rank
FWRG.L
XLKQ.L
FWRG.L vs. XLKQ.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 Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.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.L | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.56 | 1.49 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.23 | 3.48 | +0.75 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.11 | 10.61 | +6.50 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FWRG.L | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.93 | 3.01 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 1.12 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 1.27 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.51 | 1.19 | +0.32 |
Drawdowns
FWRG.L vs. XLKQ.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FWRG.L drawdown since its inception was -18.88%, smaller than the maximum XLKQ.L drawdown of -35.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FWRG.L and XLKQ.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FWRG.L | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.88% | -35.00% | +16.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.14% | -16.81% | +9.67% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -26.96% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -35.00% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.00% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.38% | 0.00% | -0.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.28% | -5.75% | +3.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.77% | 5.52% | -3.75% |
Volatility
FWRG.L vs. XLKQ.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Acc (FWRG.L) is 2.96%, while Invesco Technology S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF GBP Acc (XLKQ.L) has a volatility of 5.98%. This indicates that FWRG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLKQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FWRG.L | XLKQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.96% | 5.98% | -3.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.69% | 14.68% | -6.99% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.33% | 19.52% | -9.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.41% | 23.30% | -10.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.41% | 22.21% | -9.80% |
FWRG.L vs. XLKQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
FWRG.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than XLKQ.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
FWRG.L vs. XLKQ.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither FWRG.L nor XLKQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
FWRG.L and XLKQ.L have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XLKQ.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLKQ.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for FWRG.L.
FWRG.L is categorized as Global Equities, while XLKQ.L is Technology Equities. FWRG.L tracks FTSE All-World Index, while XLKQ.L tracks S&P Select Sector Capped 20% Technology Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FWRG.L and 0.14% for XLKQ.L.
Find the right allocation for FWRG.L and XLKQ.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