HLTW.L vs. WHCE.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

HLTW.L (Lyxor UCITS MSCI World Health Care TR C-USD) and WHCE.L (Invesco S&P World Health Care ESG UCITS ETF Acc) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - HLTW.L tracks the MSCI World/Health Care NR USD while WHCE.L tracks the S&P World ESG Enhanced Health Care Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, HLTW.L returned 5.29%/yr vs 5.96%/yr for WHCE.L. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. HLTW.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for WHCE.L.

Performance

HLTW.L vs. WHCE.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lyxor UCITS MSCI World Health Care TR C-USD (HLTW.L) and Invesco S&P World Health Care ESG UCITS ETF Acc (WHCE.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HLTW.L achieves a -3.12% return, which is significantly higher than WHCE.L's -4.23% return.

HLTW.L

• 1D: 3.02%
• 1M: 1.93%
• YTD: -3.12%
• 6M: -1.75%
• 1Y: 11.48%
• 3Y*: 5.29%
• 5Y*: 4.29%
• 10Y*: 7.69%

WHCE.L

• 1D: 2.89%
• 1M: 2.79%
• YTD: -4.23%
• 6M: -2.65%
• 1Y: 12.09%
• 3Y*: 5.96%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

HLTW.L vs. WHCE.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HLTW.L Lyxor UCITS MSCI World Health Care TR C-USD	-3.12%	15.73%	0.39%	1.34%
WHCE.L Invesco S&P World Health Care ESG UCITS ETF Acc	-4.23%	15.94%	1.55%	2.96%

Correlation

The correlation between HLTW.L and WHCE.L is 0.96 - 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	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 18, 2023	0.96

The correlation between HLTW.L and WHCE.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

HLTW.L vs. WHCE.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

HLTW.L

HLTW.L Risk / Return Rank: 24
HLTW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
HLTW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
HLTW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 22
HLTW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
HLTW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 23

WHCE.L

WHCE.L Risk / Return Rank: 22
WHCE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
WHCE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
WHCE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 22
WHCE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
WHCE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 21

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.

HLTW.L vs. WHCE.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor UCITS MSCI World Health Care TR C-USD (HLTW.L) and Invesco S&P World Health Care ESG UCITS ETF Acc (WHCE.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.

	HLTW.L	WHCE.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.79	0.76	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.30	1.27	+0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.14	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.14	0.96	+0.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.84	2.51	+0.32
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HLTW.L vs. WHCE.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HLTW.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.79, which is comparable to the WHCE.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HLTW.L and WHCE.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HLTW.L	WHCE.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.79	0.76	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.52	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.75	0.35	+0.40

Drawdowns

HLTW.L vs. WHCE.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HLTW.L drawdown since its inception was -26.58%, which is greater than WHCE.L's maximum drawdown of -20.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HLTW.L and WHCE.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	HLTW.L	WHCE.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.58%	-20.11%	-6.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.12%	-12.46%	+2.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.19%	-20.11%	+0.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.19%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-26.58%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.90%	-7.25%	+1.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.20%	-6.13%	+0.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.06%	4.76%	-0.70%

Volatility

HLTW.L vs. WHCE.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Lyxor UCITS MSCI World Health Care TR C-USD (HLTW.L) is 4.82%, while Invesco S&P World Health Care ESG UCITS ETF Acc (WHCE.L) has a volatility of 5.21%. This indicates that HLTW.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WHCE.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HLTW.L	WHCE.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.82%	5.21%	-0.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.63%	11.59%	-0.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.52%	15.65%	-1.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.16%	13.98%	+0.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.85%	13.98%	+0.87%

HLTW.L vs. WHCE.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HLTW.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than WHCE.L's 0.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

HLTW.L vs. WHCE.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither HLTW.L nor WHCE.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HLTW.L and WHCE.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, HLTW.L and WHCE.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.

Which ETF is better, HLTW.L or WHCE.L?

On fees, WHCE.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HLTW.L or WHCE.L?

WHCE.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for HLTW.L.

What is the main difference between HLTW.L and WHCE.L?

HLTW.L tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD, while WHCE.L tracks S&P World ESG Enhanced Health Care Index. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HLTW.L and 0.18% for WHCE.L.