GXLF.L vs. XLFS.L
GXLF.L (SPDR S&P US Financials Select Sector UCITS ETF) and XLFS.L (Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc) are both Financials Equities funds - GXLF.L tracks the MSCI World/Financials NR USD while XLFS.L tracks the S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Financials Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GXLF.L returned 15.45%/yr vs 15.52%/yr for XLFS.L. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GXLF.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLFS.L.
Performance
GXLF.L vs. XLFS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
GXLF.L is traded in GBP, while XLFS.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XLFS.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 XLFS.L's -4.53% return.
GXLF.L
- 1D
- 3.21%
- 1M
- 2.06%
- YTD
- -4.87%
- 6M
- -2.66%
- 1Y
- 4.61%
- 3Y*
- 15.45%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XLFS.L
- 1D
- 3.23%
- 1M
- 2.25%
- YTD
- -4.53%
- 6M
- -2.67%
- 1Y
- 4.66%
- 3Y*
- 15.52%
- 5Y*
- 9.11%
- 10Y*
- 13.02%
GXLF.L vs. XLFS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GXLF.L SPDR S&P US Financials Select Sector UCITS ETF | -4.87% | 7.31% | 32.20% | 6.05% | -1.25% |
XLFS.L Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc | -4.53% | 6.80% | 32.42% | 6.51% | -2.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between GXLF.L and XLFS.L is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 6, 2022 | 0.94 |
The correlation between GXLF.L and XLFS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. XLFS.L — Risk / Return Rank
GXLF.L
XLFS.L
GXLF.L vs. XLFS.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 Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.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.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.06 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.36 | 0.35 | +0.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.84 | 0.85 | -0.01 |
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
| GXLF.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 | 0.31 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.49 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.63 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.51 | 0.61 | -0.10 |
Drawdowns
GXLF.L vs. XLFS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GXLF.L drawdown since its inception was -18.21%, smaller than the maximum XLFS.L drawdown of -35.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GXLF.L and XLFS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GXLF.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.21% | -35.78% | +17.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.80% | -13.13% | +0.33% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.21% | -18.78% | +0.57% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -18.78% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.78% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.67% | -6.47% | -0.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.79% | -6.60% | +0.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.48% | 5.45% | +0.03% |
Volatility
GXLF.L vs. XLFS.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR S&P US Financials Select Sector UCITS ETF (GXLF.L) is 4.36%, while Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.L) has a volatility of 4.68%. This indicates that GXLF.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLFS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GXLF.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.36% | 4.68% | -0.32% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.64% | 11.44% | -0.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.08% | 14.92% | -0.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.99% | 18.54% | -1.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.99% | 20.81% | -3.82% |
GXLF.L vs. XLFS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
GXLF.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than XLFS.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
GXLF.L vs. XLFS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither GXLF.L nor XLFS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.95, GXLF.L and XLFS.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, XLFS.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLFS.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for GXLF.L.
GXLF.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while XLFS.L tracks S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Financials Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for GXLF.L and 0.14% for XLFS.L.
Find the right allocation for GXLF.L and XLFS.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