PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GXLF.L vs. IMID.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GXLF.L vs. IMID.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR S&P US Financials Select Sector UCITS ETF (GXLF.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

GXLF.L is traded in GBP, while IMID.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IMID.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GXLF.L achieves a -4.87% return, which is significantly lower than IMID.L's 12.81% return.


GXLF.L

1D
3.21%
1M
2.06%
YTD
-4.87%
6M
-2.66%
1Y
4.61%
3Y*
15.45%
5Y*
10Y*

IMID.L

1D
0.04%
1M
5.41%
YTD
12.81%
6M
12.92%
1Y
31.35%
3Y*
17.80%
5Y*
12.17%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GXLF.L vs. IMID.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
GXLF.L
SPDR S&P US Financials Select Sector UCITS ETF
-4.87%7.31%32.20%6.05%-1.25%
IMID.L
SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI
12.81%13.45%18.35%15.57%-6.47%

Correlation

The correlation between GXLF.L and IMID.L is 0.51, 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

0.51

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

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 6, 2022

0.64

The correlation between GXLF.L and IMID.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.64 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

GXLF.L vs. IMID.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GXLF.L
GXLF.L Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
GXLF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GXLF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
GXLF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
GXLF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
GXLF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

IMID.L
IMID.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
IMID.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMID.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMID.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
IMID.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMID.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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.

GXLF.L vs. IMID.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P US Financials Select Sector UCITS ETF (GXLF.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.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.


GXLF.LIMID.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.00

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.49

-0.42

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.36

4.54

-4.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.84

17.18

-16.34

GXLF.L vs. IMID.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GXLF.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.33, which is lower than the IMID.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GXLF.L and IMID.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


GXLF.LIMID.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.33

2.58

-2.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.85

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.51

0.57

-0.06

Drawdowns

GXLF.L vs. IMID.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GXLF.L drawdown since its inception was -18.21%, smaller than the maximum IMID.L drawdown of -37.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GXLF.L and IMID.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GXLF.LIMID.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.21%

-37.84%

+19.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.80%

-6.85%

-5.95%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.21%

-18.69%

+0.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.69%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.67%

-0.29%

-6.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.79%

-3.69%

-2.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.48%

1.82%

+3.66%

Volatility

GXLF.L vs. IMID.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P US Financials Select Sector UCITS ETF (GXLF.L) has a higher volatility of 4.36% compared to SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) at 3.55%. This indicates that GXLF.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IMID.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GXLF.LIMID.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.36%

3.55%

+0.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.64%

9.34%

+1.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.08%

12.05%

+2.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.99%

14.26%

+2.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.99%

20.46%

-3.47%

GXLF.L vs. IMID.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GXLF.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than IMID.L's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

GXLF.L vs. IMID.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither GXLF.L nor IMID.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


GXLF.L and IMID.L have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

GXLF.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for IMID.L.

GXLF.L is categorized as Financials Equities, while IMID.L is Global Equities. GXLF.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while IMID.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for GXLF.L and 0.40% for IMID.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GXLF.L and IMID.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