PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MLPD.L (Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist)) and FTWG.L (Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist) are both exchange-traded funds - MLPD.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while FTWG.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the FTSE All-World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, MLPD.L returned 16.43% vs 29.53% for FTWG.L. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MLPD.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FTWG.L.

Performance

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist) (MLPD.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

MLPD.L is traded in USD, while FTWG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the FTWG.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MLPD.L achieves a 19.38% return, which is significantly higher than FTWG.L's 11.64% return.

MLPD.L

1D
1.11%
1M
0.78%
YTD
19.38%
6M
16.54%
1Y
16.43%
3Y*
19.18%
5Y*
17.42%
10Y*
7.30%

FTWG.L

1D
-0.65%
1M
4.80%
YTD
11.64%
6M
13.32%
1Y
29.53%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023
MLPD.L
Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist)		19.38%2.33%22.53%12.51%
FTWG.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist		11.64%22.73%17.92%8.17%

Correlation

The correlation between MLPD.L and FTWG.L is 0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

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

0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023

0.28

Over the past year, the correlation between MLPD.L and FTWG.L has dropped to 0.03 - well below their long-term average of 0.28, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
MLPD.L
FTWG.L

Energy

96.7%
4.3%

Utilities

3.2%
2.6%

Industrials

0.2%
11.0%

Basic Materials

-

3.9%

Communication Services

-

8.9%

Consumer Cyclical

-

9.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

5.0%

Financial Services

-

16.4%

Healthcare

-

7.6%

Real Estate

-

1.9%

Technology

-

29.1%

Energy

MLPD.L
96.7%
FTWG.L
4.3%

Utilities

MLPD.L
3.2%
FTWG.L
2.6%

Industrials

MLPD.L
0.2%
FTWG.L
11.0%

Basic Materials

MLPD.L

-

FTWG.L
3.9%

Communication Services

MLPD.L

-

FTWG.L
8.9%

Consumer Cyclical

MLPD.L

-

FTWG.L
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

MLPD.L

-

FTWG.L
5.0%

Financial Services

MLPD.L

-

FTWG.L
16.4%

Healthcare

MLPD.L

-

FTWG.L
7.6%

Real Estate

MLPD.L

-

FTWG.L
1.9%

Technology

MLPD.L

-

FTWG.L
29.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist)

Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist

Often compared with MLPD.L:
MLPD.L vs. MLPXMLPD.L vs. MLPAMLPD.L vs. TDIV.ASMLPD.L vs. EIPIXMLPD.L vs. JEPQMLPD.L vs. QYLDMLPD.L vs. MAIN
Often compared with FTWG.L:
FTWG.L vs. VWRP.LFTWG.L vs. FWRGFTWG.L vs. VWRL.LFTWG.L vs. VEVE.LFTWG.L vs. VUSA.LFTWG.L vs. XXTW.LFTWG.L vs. VOO

Return for Risk

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MLPD.L
MLPD.L Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
MLPD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MLPD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
MLPD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
MLPD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
MLPD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank
FTWG.L
FTWG.L Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
FTWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
FTWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
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.

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist) (MLPD.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.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.

MLPD.LFTWG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.15
2.51

-1.36

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.62
3.66

-2.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.46

-0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.93

3.20

-1.27

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.95

13.94

-8.99

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MLPD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is lower than the FTWG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MLPD.L and FTWG.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

MLPD.LFTWG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.15

2.51

-1.36

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.85

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.26

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.15

1.60

-1.45

Drawdowns

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MLPD.L drawdown since its inception was -82.22%, which is greater than FTWG.L's maximum drawdown of -16.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPD.L and FTWG.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MLPD.LFTWG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-82.22%

-16.89%

-65.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.49%

-9.20%

+0.71%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.23%

—

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.78%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.74%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.71%

-0.65%

-2.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.24%

-1.90%

-26.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.31%

2.11%

+1.20%

Volatility

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist) (MLPD.L) has a higher volatility of 5.23% compared to Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.L) at 3.42%. This indicates that MLPD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FTWG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MLPD.LFTWG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.23%

3.42%

+1.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.96%

8.99%

+1.97%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.23%

11.73%

+2.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.38%

13.13%

+7.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.35%

13.13%

+15.22%

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MLPD.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FTWG.L's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

MLPD.L vs. FTWG.L - Dividend Comparison

MLPD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.53%, more than FTWG.L's 1.21% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FTWG.L
Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist		1.21%1.34%1.50%0.70%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MLPD.L
Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (Dist)		7.53%8.21%8.18%8.60%7.98%8.57%11.03%10.06%9.87%8.15%8.14%9.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

MLPD.L and FTWG.L have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, FTWG.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FTWG.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MLPD.L.

MLPD.L is categorized as Energy Equities, while FTWG.L is Global Equities. MLPD.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while FTWG.L tracks FTSE All-World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MLPD.L and 0.15% for FTWG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MLPD.L and FTWG.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