INTL.L vs. QWTM.L
INTL.L (WisdomTree Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF - USD Acc) and QWTM.L (WisdomTree Quantum Computing UCITS ETF - USD Acc) are both Technology Equities funds from WisdomTree - INTL.L tracks the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD while QWTM.L tracks the WisdomTree Classiq Quantum Computing UCITS Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. INTL.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for QWTM.L.
Performance
INTL.L vs. QWTM.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, INTL.L achieves a 50.10% return, which is significantly lower than QWTM.L's 54.42% return.
INTL.L
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 25.51%
- YTD
- 50.10%
- 6M
- 51.64%
- 1Y
- 96.68%
- 3Y*
- 31.07%
- 5Y*
- 17.40%
- 10Y*
- —
QWTM.L
- 1D
- -2.39%
- 1M
- 27.41%
- YTD
- 54.42%
- 6M
- 52.73%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
INTL.L vs. QWTM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
INTL.L WisdomTree Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF - USD Acc | 50.10% | 14.02% |
QWTM.L WisdomTree Quantum Computing UCITS ETF - USD Acc | 54.42% | 19.86% |
Correlation
The correlation between INTL.L and QWTM.L is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 4, 2025 | 0.75 |
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
INTL.L vs. QWTM.L — Risk / Return Rank
INTL.L
QWTM.L
INTL.L vs. QWTM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF - USD Acc (INTL.L) and WisdomTree Quantum Computing UCITS ETF - USD Acc (QWTM.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.
| INTL.L | QWTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.58 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.37 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.68 | — | — |
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
| INTL.L | QWTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.85 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.95 | 3.28 | -2.33 |
Drawdowns
INTL.L vs. QWTM.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum INTL.L drawdown since its inception was -37.71%, which is greater than QWTM.L's maximum drawdown of -23.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INTL.L and QWTM.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| INTL.L | QWTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.71% | -23.74% | -13.97% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.10% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.54% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.92% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.17% | -2.39% | +2.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.00% | -10.24% | -0.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.90% | — | — |
Volatility
INTL.L vs. QWTM.L - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| INTL.L | QWTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.73% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.45% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.03% | 39.20% | -14.17% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.61% | 39.20% | -13.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.29% | 39.20% | -12.91% |
INTL.L vs. QWTM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
INTL.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than QWTM.L's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
INTL.L vs. QWTM.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither INTL.L nor QWTM.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
INTL.L and QWTM.L have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, INTL.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
INTL.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for QWTM.L.
INTL.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD, while QWTM.L tracks WisdomTree Classiq Quantum Computing UCITS Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for INTL.L and 0.50% for QWTM.L.
Find the right allocation for INTL.L and QWTM.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