PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MCTS.L vs. XFSN.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MCTS.L vs. XFSN.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI China Technology All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCTS.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Fintech Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XFSN.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

MCTS.L is traded in GBp, while XFSN.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the XFSN.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 higher than XFSN.L's -2.90% return.


MCTS.L

1D
-0.56%
1M
3.20%
YTD
2.74%
6M
1.09%
1Y
19.04%
3Y*
10.05%
5Y*
10Y*

XFSN.L

1D
0.59%
1M
5.60%
YTD
-2.90%
6M
-4.80%
1Y
-1.50%
3Y*
13.72%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MCTS.L vs. XFSN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
MCTS.L
Invesco MSCI China Technology All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc
2.74%23.52%22.51%-23.51%-16.03%
XFSN.L
Xtrackers MSCI Fintech Innovation UCITS ETF 1C
-2.90%2.93%34.89%21.37%-7.30%

Correlation

The correlation between MCTS.L and XFSN.L is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.45

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

0.48

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 21, 2022

0.53

The correlation between MCTS.L and XFSN.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.45 to 0.53 - 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

MCTS.L vs. XFSN.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCTS.L
MCTS.L Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
MCTS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCTS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCTS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
MCTS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCTS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

XFSN.L
XFSN.L Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
XFSN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XFSN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
XFSN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
XFSN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
XFSN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 99
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.

MCTS.L vs. XFSN.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 Xtrackers MSCI Fintech Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XFSN.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.LXFSN.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.50

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.00

+0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.54

-0.06

+0.60

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.82

-0.13

+0.95

MCTS.L vs. XFSN.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCTS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.41, which is higher than the XFSN.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCTS.L and XFSN.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


MCTS.LXFSN.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.41

-0.10

+0.50

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.11

0.61

-0.72

Drawdowns

MCTS.L vs. XFSN.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCTS.L drawdown since its inception was -59.88%, which is greater than XFSN.L's maximum drawdown of -23.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCTS.L and XFSN.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MCTS.LXFSN.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.88%

-23.96%

-35.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-35.37%

-23.96%

-11.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-35.37%

-23.96%

-11.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-27.96%

-11.60%

-16.36%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-36.22%

-6.19%

-30.03%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

23.12%

11.38%

+11.74%

Volatility

MCTS.L vs. XFSN.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI China Technology All Shares Stock Connect UCITS ETF Acc (MCTS.L) has a higher volatility of 8.34% compared to Xtrackers MSCI Fintech Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XFSN.L) at 4.10%. This indicates that MCTS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XFSN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MCTS.LXFSN.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.34%

4.10%

+4.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.92%

11.66%

+3.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

46.61%

15.56%

+31.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

44.13%

18.54%

+25.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

44.13%

18.54%

+25.59%

MCTS.L vs. XFSN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCTS.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than XFSN.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

MCTS.L vs. XFSN.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MCTS.L nor XFSN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


MCTS.L and XFSN.L have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XFSN.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XFSN.L is cheaper with a 0.35% 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 DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MCTS.L and 0.35% for XFSN.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MCTS.L and XFSN.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