LUXG.L vs. XLPS.L
LUXG.L (Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD) and XLPS.L (Invesco Consumer Staples S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc) are both Consumer Staples Equities funds - LUXG.L tracks the Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR while XLPS.L tracks the S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Consumer Staples Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LUXG.L returned 10.54%/yr vs 8.37%/yr for XLPS.L. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LUXG.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLPS.L.
Performance
LUXG.L vs. XLPS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
LUXG.L is traded in GBp, while XLPS.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XLPS.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LUXG.L achieves a -7.30% return, which is significantly lower than XLPS.L's 6.84% return. Over the past 10 years, LUXG.L has outperformed XLPS.L with an annualized return of 10.54%, while XLPS.L has yielded a comparatively lower 8.37% annualized return.
LUXG.L
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- 5.50%
- YTD
- -7.30%
- 6M
- -6.56%
- 1Y
- 5.65%
- 3Y*
- -0.76%
- 5Y*
- 0.46%
- 10Y*
- 10.54%
XLPS.L
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- -1.91%
- YTD
- 6.84%
- 6M
- 6.11%
- 1Y
- 3.13%
- 3Y*
- 5.63%
- 5Y*
- 7.91%
- 10Y*
- 8.37%
LUXG.L vs. XLPS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LUXG.L Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD | -7.30% | 6.94% | -0.12% | 9.77% | -14.46% | 23.84% | 31.63% | 24.83% | -7.67% | 26.63% |
XLPS.L Invesco Consumer Staples S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc | 6.84% | -3.42% | 16.25% | -5.24% | 11.70% | 19.17% | 5.95% | 22.03% | -4.03% | 2.68% |
Correlation
The correlation between LUXG.L and XLPS.L is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2016 | 0.34 |
Over the past year, the correlation between LUXG.L and XLPS.L has dropped to 0.13 - well below their long-term average of 0.34, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
LUXG.L vs. XLPS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
-
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
-
Utilities
-
Energy
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
Consumer Cyclical
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
Communication Services
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
-
Healthcare
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
-
Financial Services
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
-
Utilities
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
-
Energy
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
-
Consumer Defensive
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
-
Industrials
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
Basic Materials
LUXG.L
-
XLPS.L
-
Real Estate
LUXG.L
-
XLPS.L
-
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
LUXG.L vs. XLPS.L — Risk / Return Rank
LUXG.L
XLPS.L
LUXG.L vs. XLPS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD (LUXG.L) and Invesco Consumer Staples S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLPS.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.
| LUXG.L | XLPS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.05 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.35 | 0.34 | +0.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.87 | 0.81 | +0.06 |
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
| LUXG.L | XLPS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.30 | 0.21 | +0.09 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.02 | 0.56 | -0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.52 | 0.55 | -0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.50 | 0.80 | -0.30 |
Drawdowns
LUXG.L vs. XLPS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LUXG.L drawdown since its inception was -36.58%, which is greater than XLPS.L's maximum drawdown of -18.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LUXG.L and XLPS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LUXG.L | XLPS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.58% | -18.63% | -17.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.95% | -9.06% | -6.89% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.30% | -11.49% | -13.81% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.20% | -14.17% | -15.03% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.58% | -18.63% | -17.95% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.83% | -7.18% | -4.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.19% | -4.56% | -3.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.48% | 3.84% | +2.64% |
Volatility
LUXG.L vs. XLPS.L - Volatility Comparison
Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD (LUXG.L) has a higher volatility of 6.60% compared to Invesco Consumer Staples S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLPS.L) at 6.13%. This indicates that LUXG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLPS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LUXG.L | XLPS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.60% | 6.13% | +0.47% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.18% | 12.08% | +3.10% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.83% | 14.59% | +4.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.57% | 14.01% | +6.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.37% | 15.16% | +5.21% |
LUXG.L vs. XLPS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
LUXG.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XLPS.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
LUXG.L vs. XLPS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither LUXG.L nor XLPS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
LUXG.L and XLPS.L have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XLPS.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLPS.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for LUXG.L.
LUXG.L tracks Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR, while XLPS.L tracks S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Consumer Staples Index. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LUXG.L and 0.14% for XLPS.L.
Find the right allocation for LUXG.L and XLPS.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