HMWD.L vs. NADQ.DE
HMWD.L (HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF) and NADQ.DE (Amundi Nasdaq-100 II UCITS ETF Dist) are both exchange-traded funds - HMWD.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while NADQ.DE is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Nasdaq 100®. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, HMWD.L returned 13.25%/yr vs 21.73%/yr for NADQ.DE. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HMWD.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for NADQ.DE.
Performance
HMWD.L vs. NADQ.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
HMWD.L is traded in USD, while NADQ.DE is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the NADQ.DE values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HMWD.L achieves a 9.88% return, which is significantly lower than NADQ.DE's 19.25% return. Over the past 10 years, HMWD.L has underperformed NADQ.DE with an annualized return of 13.25%, while NADQ.DE has yielded a comparatively higher 21.73% annualized return.
HMWD.L
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 4.12%
- YTD
- 9.88%
- 6M
- 11.06%
- 1Y
- 26.15%
- 3Y*
- 20.87%
- 5Y*
- 11.93%
- 10Y*
- 13.25%
NADQ.DE
- 1D
- -0.74%
- 1M
- 8.49%
- YTD
- 19.25%
- 6M
- 19.11%
- 1Y
- 40.37%
- 3Y*
- 28.15%
- 5Y*
- 17.82%
- 10Y*
- 21.73%
HMWD.L vs. NADQ.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HMWD.L HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF | 9.88% | 21.06% | 19.13% | 24.63% | -18.24% | 22.41% | 16.43% | 27.43% | -8.89% | 23.12% |
NADQ.DE Amundi Nasdaq-100 II UCITS ETF Dist | 19.25% | 20.84% | 26.41% | 56.25% | -33.77% | 28.73% | 47.89% | 40.01% | -1.57% | 32.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between HMWD.L and NADQ.DE is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2010 | 0.74 |
The correlation between HMWD.L and NADQ.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.83 - 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
HMWD.L vs. NADQ.DE — Risk / Return Rank
HMWD.L
NADQ.DE
HMWD.L vs. NADQ.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF (HMWD.L) and Amundi Nasdaq-100 II UCITS ETF Dist (NADQ.DE). 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.
| HMWD.L | NADQ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.43 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.14 | 3.68 | -0.54 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.35 | 13.72 | -0.36 |
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
| HMWD.L | NADQ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.19 | 2.55 | -0.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.77 | 0.85 | -0.09 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.83 | 1.11 | -0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.74 | 0.88 | -0.14 |
Drawdowns
HMWD.L vs. NADQ.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HMWD.L drawdown since its inception was -34.03%, smaller than the maximum NADQ.DE drawdown of -39.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMWD.L and NADQ.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HMWD.L | NADQ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.03% | -39.45% | +5.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.29% | -10.91% | +2.62% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.57% | -23.11% | +5.54% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.00% | -34.98% | +8.98% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.03% | -34.98% | +0.95% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.40% | -0.89% | +0.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.57% | -5.96% | +1.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.95% | 2.93% | -0.98% |
Volatility
HMWD.L vs. NADQ.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF (HMWD.L) is 3.41%, while Amundi Nasdaq-100 II UCITS ETF Dist (NADQ.DE) has a volatility of 4.50%. This indicates that HMWD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NADQ.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HMWD.L | NADQ.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.41% | 4.50% | -1.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.13% | 11.44% | -2.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.87% | 15.78% | -3.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.57% | 20.63% | -5.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.85% | 19.87% | -4.02% |
HMWD.L vs. NADQ.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
HMWD.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than NADQ.DE's 0.22% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
HMWD.L vs. NADQ.DE - Dividend Comparison
HMWD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, more than NADQ.DE's 0.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HMWD.L HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF | 1.17% | 1.24% | 1.43% | 1.57% | 1.79% | 1.31% | 1.44% | 1.91% | 2.23% | 1.81% | 2.00% | 1.93% |
NADQ.DE Amundi Nasdaq-100 II UCITS ETF Dist | 0.33% | 0.40% | 0.55% | 0.40% | 0.79% | 0.51% | 0.40% | 0.54% | 0.63% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HMWD.L and NADQ.DE have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HMWD.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HMWD.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.22% for NADQ.DE.
HMWD.L is categorized as Global Equities, while NADQ.DE is Nasdaq-100. HMWD.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while NADQ.DE tracks Nasdaq 100®. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for HMWD.L and 0.22% for NADQ.DE.
Find the right allocation for HMWD.L and NADQ.DE
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