PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HSBC Multi Factor Worldwide Equity UCITS ETF (HWWA.L) and HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF (HMUS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

HWWA.L is traded in GBP, while HMUS.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the HMUS.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HWWA.L achieves a 14.08% return, which is significantly higher than HMUS.L's 7.66% return. Over the past 10 years, HWWA.L has underperformed HMUS.L with an annualized return of 13.41%, while HMUS.L has yielded a comparatively higher 14.19% annualized return.


HWWA.L

1D
-0.02%
1M
6.39%
YTD
14.08%
6M
15.66%
1Y
34.98%
3Y*
19.71%
5Y*
13.07%
10Y*
13.41%

HMUS.L

1D
0.28%
1M
5.02%
YTD
7.66%
6M
7.76%
1Y
21.62%
3Y*
16.26%
5Y*
12.23%
10Y*
14.19%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HWWA.L
HSBC Multi Factor Worldwide Equity UCITS ETF
14.08%16.74%17.83%15.71%-7.83%21.70%11.03%18.57%-5.55%12.89%
HMUS.L
HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF
7.66%5.24%25.87%19.21%-11.56%27.15%15.77%24.66%-1.56%9.13%

Correlation

The correlation between HWWA.L and HMUS.L is 0.79, 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

0.79

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

0.83

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.81

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2014

0.81

The correlation between HWWA.L and HMUS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
HWWA.L
HMUS.L

Technology

34.2%
38.7%

Financial Services

14.0%
11.2%

Industrials

13.2%
7.7%

Communication Services

8.4%
10.6%

Consumer Cyclical

8.3%
9.0%

Basic Materials

5.8%
1.6%

Healthcare

5.6%
9.3%

Energy

4.2%
3.8%

Utilities

2.5%
1.7%

Consumer Defensive

2.2%
4.7%

Real Estate

1.4%
1.8%

Technology

HWWA.L
34.2%
HMUS.L
38.7%

Financial Services

HWWA.L
14.0%
HMUS.L
11.2%

Industrials

HWWA.L
13.2%
HMUS.L
7.7%

Communication Services

HWWA.L
8.4%
HMUS.L
10.6%

Consumer Cyclical

HWWA.L
8.3%
HMUS.L
9.0%

Basic Materials

HWWA.L
5.8%
HMUS.L
1.6%

Healthcare

HWWA.L
5.6%
HMUS.L
9.3%

Energy

HWWA.L
4.2%
HMUS.L
3.8%

Utilities

HWWA.L
2.5%
HMUS.L
1.7%

Consumer Defensive

HWWA.L
2.2%
HMUS.L
4.7%

Real Estate

HWWA.L
1.4%
HMUS.L
1.8%

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

HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

HWWA.L
HWWA.L Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
HWWA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HWWA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
HWWA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
HWWA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
HWWA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank

HMUS.L
HMUS.L Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
HMUS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMUS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMUS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
HMUS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMUS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
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.

HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC Multi Factor Worldwide Equity UCITS ETF (HWWA.L) and HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF (HMUS.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.


HWWA.LHMUS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.65

1.39

+0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.16

3.36

+1.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.78

12.55

+9.22

HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HWWA.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.41, which is higher than the HMUS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HWWA.L and HMUS.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


HWWA.LHMUS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.41

2.15

+1.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.03

0.90

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.93

0.98

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.84

0.92

-0.08

Drawdowns

HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HWWA.L drawdown since its inception was -25.12%, roughly equal to the maximum HMUS.L drawdown of -25.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HWWA.L and HMUS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HWWA.LHMUS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.12%

-25.78%

+0.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.74%

-6.80%

+0.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.79%

-21.87%

+5.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.79%

-21.87%

+5.08%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.12%

-25.78%

+0.66%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.02%

0.00%

-0.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.53%

-3.65%

+0.12%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.60%

1.82%

-0.22%

Volatility

HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC Multi Factor Worldwide Equity UCITS ETF (HWWA.L) has a higher volatility of 3.43% compared to HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF (HMUS.L) at 2.49%. This indicates that HWWA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HMUS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HWWA.LHMUS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.43%

2.49%

+0.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.84%

7.42%

+0.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.26%

10.69%

-0.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.69%

15.18%

-2.49%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.33%

16.78%

-2.45%

HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HWWA.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than HMUS.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

HWWA.L vs. HMUS.L - Dividend Comparison

HWWA.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.29%, more than HMUS.L's 0.01% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HMUS.L
HSBC MSCI USA UCITS ETF
0.01%0.01%0.01%0.01%0.01%0.01%0.01%0.01%0.01%0.01%0.01%0.01%
HWWA.L
HSBC Multi Factor Worldwide Equity UCITS ETF
1.29%1.43%1.58%1.95%2.07%1.48%1.45%2.07%2.10%1.86%1.71%1.97%

Frequently Asked Questions


HWWA.L and HMUS.L have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HWWA.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HWWA.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for HMUS.L.

HWWA.L is categorized as Global Equities, while HMUS.L is Large Cap Blend Equities. HWWA.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while HMUS.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for HWWA.L and 0.30% for HMUS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HWWA.L and HMUS.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