METP.L vs. NATP.L
METP.L (HANetf ETC Group Global Metaverse UCITS ETF) and NATP.L (HANetf Future of Defence UCITS ETF Acc GBP) are both exchange-traded funds - METP.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD, while NATP.L is a Aerospace & Defense fund tracking the EQM Future of Defence Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, METP.L returned -3.64% vs 20.19% for NATP.L. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. METP.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for NATP.L.
Performance
METP.L vs. NATP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, METP.L achieves a -8.08% return, which is significantly lower than NATP.L's 12.33% return.
METP.L
- 1D
- -5.28%
- 1M
- 4.65%
- YTD
- -8.08%
- 6M
- -14.44%
- 1Y
- -3.64%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NATP.L
- 1D
- -0.72%
- 1M
- 7.31%
- YTD
- 12.33%
- 6M
- 13.80%
- 1Y
- 20.19%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
METP.L vs. NATP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
METP.L HANetf ETC Group Global Metaverse UCITS ETF | -8.08% | 21.88% |
NATP.L HANetf Future of Defence UCITS ETF Acc GBP | 12.33% | 20.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between METP.L and NATP.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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 29, 2025 | 0.44 |
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
METP.L vs. NATP.L — Risk / Return Rank
METP.L
NATP.L
METP.L vs. NATP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf ETC Group Global Metaverse UCITS ETF (METP.L) and HANetf Future of Defence UCITS ETF Acc GBP (NATP.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.
| METP.L | NATP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | 1.19 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.07 | 1.74 | -1.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.12 | 3.88 | -3.99 |
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
| METP.L | NATP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.07 | 1.04 | -1.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.21 | 2.05 | -1.83 |
Drawdowns
METP.L vs. NATP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum METP.L drawdown since its inception was -53.17%, which is greater than NATP.L's maximum drawdown of -11.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for METP.L and NATP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| METP.L | NATP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.17% | -11.66% | -41.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -53.17% | -11.55% | -41.62% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -42.94% | -2.70% | -40.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.16% | -2.37% | -20.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 31.91% | 5.20% | +26.71% |
Volatility
METP.L vs. NATP.L - Volatility Comparison
HANetf ETC Group Global Metaverse UCITS ETF (METP.L) has a higher volatility of 10.24% compared to HANetf Future of Defence UCITS ETF Acc GBP (NATP.L) at 5.77%. This indicates that METP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NATP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| METP.L | NATP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.24% | 5.77% | +4.47% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.43% | 15.14% | +5.29% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 52.25% | 19.33% | +32.92% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 51.09% | 18.36% | +32.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 51.09% | 18.36% | +32.73% |
METP.L vs. NATP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
METP.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than NATP.L's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
METP.L vs. NATP.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither METP.L nor NATP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
METP.L and NATP.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, NATP.L is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NATP.L is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for METP.L.
METP.L is categorized as Technology Equities, while NATP.L is Aerospace & Defense. METP.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD, while NATP.L tracks EQM Future of Defence Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for METP.L and 0.49% for NATP.L.
Find the right allocation for METP.L and NATP.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