MCTS.L vs. ECAR.L
MCTS.L (Invesco MSCI China Technology All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc) and ECAR.L (iShares Electric Vehicles and Driving Technology UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both Technology Equities funds tracking the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD, from Invesco and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MCTS.L returned 10.05%/yr vs 23.94%/yr for ECAR.L. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MCTS.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ECAR.L.
Performance
MCTS.L vs. ECAR.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
MCTS.L is traded in GBp, while ECAR.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the ECAR.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCTS.L achieves a 2.74% return, which is significantly lower than ECAR.L's 58.49% return.
MCTS.L
- 1D
- -0.56%
- 1M
- 3.20%
- YTD
- 2.74%
- 6M
- 1.09%
- 1Y
- 19.04%
- 3Y*
- 10.05%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ECAR.L
- 1D
- -1.93%
- 1M
- 21.69%
- YTD
- 58.49%
- 6M
- 57.93%
- 1Y
- 93.80%
- 3Y*
- 23.94%
- 5Y*
- 13.67%
- 10Y*
- —
MCTS.L vs. ECAR.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MCTS.L Invesco MSCI China Technology All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc | 2.74% | 23.52% | 22.51% | -23.51% | -22.15% | -14.72% |
ECAR.L iShares Electric Vehicles and Driving Technology UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 58.49% | 15.47% | 0.80% | 20.74% | -18.63% | 4.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCTS.L and ECAR.L is 0.53, 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 | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2021 | 0.44 |
The correlation between MCTS.L and ECAR.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.44 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.
MCTS.L vs. ECAR.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
-
Industrials
Basic Materials
Utilities
-
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
-
Technology
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
Consumer Cyclical
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
Communication Services
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
-
Industrials
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
Basic Materials
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
Utilities
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
-
Healthcare
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
-
Financial Services
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
-
Real Estate
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
-
Consumer Defensive
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
-
Energy
MCTS.L
-
ECAR.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
MCTS.L vs. ECAR.L — Risk / Return Rank
MCTS.L
ECAR.L
MCTS.L vs. ECAR.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI China Technology All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCTS.L) and iShares Electric Vehicles and Driving Technology UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ECAR.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.
| MCTS.L | ECAR.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.80 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | 1.59 | -0.40 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.54 | 7.54 | -7.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.82 | 22.95 | -22.13 |
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
| MCTS.L | ECAR.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41 | 3.77 | -3.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.60 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.11 | 0.65 | -0.75 |
Drawdowns
MCTS.L vs. ECAR.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCTS.L drawdown since its inception was -59.88%, which is greater than ECAR.L's maximum drawdown of -35.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCTS.L and ECAR.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCTS.L | ECAR.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.88% | -35.94% | -23.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -35.37% | -12.38% | -22.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -35.37% | -28.42% | -6.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -28.74% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.96% | -1.93% | -26.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -36.22% | -8.68% | -27.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 23.12% | 4.07% | +19.05% |
Volatility
MCTS.L vs. ECAR.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco MSCI China Technology All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCTS.L) is 8.34%, while iShares Electric Vehicles and Driving Technology UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ECAR.L) has a volatility of 12.19%. This indicates that MCTS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ECAR.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MCTS.L | ECAR.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.34% | 12.19% | -3.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.92% | 20.24% | -5.32% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 46.61% | 24.73% | +21.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 44.13% | 22.87% | +21.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 44.13% | 23.91% | +20.22% |
MCTS.L vs. ECAR.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCTS.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than ECAR.L's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
MCTS.L vs. ECAR.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither MCTS.L nor ECAR.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
MCTS.L and ECAR.L have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ECAR.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ECAR.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for MCTS.L.
Both ETFs track MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MCTS.L and 0.40% for ECAR.L.
Find the right allocation for MCTS.L and ECAR.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