MLPQ.L vs. FWRA.L
MLPQ.L (Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF) and FWRA.L (Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation) are both exchange-traded funds - MLPQ.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while FWRA.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the FTSE All-World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, MLPQ.L returned 16.79% vs 30.18% for FWRA.L. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MLPQ.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FWRA.L.
Performance
MLPQ.L vs. FWRA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
MLPQ.L is traded in GBp, while FWRA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the FWRA.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MLPQ.L achieves a 18.94% return, which is significantly higher than FWRA.L's 12.15% return.
MLPQ.L
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- 0.83%
- YTD
- 18.94%
- 6M
- 13.87%
- 1Y
- 16.79%
- 3Y*
- 15.76%
- 5Y*
- 18.54%
- 10Y*
- 7.75%
FWRA.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 5.33%
- YTD
- 12.15%
- 6M
- 12.33%
- 1Y
- 30.18%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MLPQ.L vs. FWRA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
MLPQ.L Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF | 18.94% | -4.55% | 24.63% | 11.03% |
FWRA.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation | 12.04% | 13.65% | 20.13% | 8.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between MLPQ.L and FWRA.L is -0.01, 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 | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023 | 0.24 |
The correlation between MLPQ.L and FWRA.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (1 year) to 0.24 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
MLPQ.L vs. FWRA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MLPQ.L
FWRA.L
Energy
Utilities
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Energy
MLPQ.L
FWRA.L
Utilities
MLPQ.L
FWRA.L
Industrials
MLPQ.L
FWRA.L
Basic Materials
MLPQ.L
-
FWRA.L
Communication Services
MLPQ.L
-
FWRA.L
Consumer Cyclical
MLPQ.L
-
FWRA.L
Consumer Defensive
MLPQ.L
-
FWRA.L
Financial Services
MLPQ.L
-
FWRA.L
Healthcare
MLPQ.L
-
FWRA.L
Real Estate
MLPQ.L
-
FWRA.L
Technology
MLPQ.L
-
FWRA.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
MLPQ.L vs. FWRA.L — Risk / Return Rank
MLPQ.L
FWRA.L
MLPQ.L vs. FWRA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (MLPQ.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.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.
| MLPQ.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.50 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.08 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.49 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.84 | 4.33 | -2.49 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.31 | 16.50 | -12.20 |
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
| MLPQ.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.04 | 2.54 | -1.50 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.94 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.28 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.19 | 1.44 | -1.25 |
Drawdowns
MLPQ.L vs. FWRA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MLPQ.L drawdown since its inception was -75.62%, which is greater than FWRA.L's maximum drawdown of -17.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MLPQ.L and FWRA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MLPQ.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -75.62% | -17.86% | -57.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.07% | -6.91% | -2.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.04% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.04% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -74.07% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.53% | -0.38% | -3.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.03% | -2.09% | -17.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.89% | 1.82% | +2.07% |
Volatility
MLPQ.L vs. FWRA.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (MLPQ.L) has a higher volatility of 6.19% compared to Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.L) at 3.67%. This indicates that MLPQ.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FWRA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MLPQ.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.19% | 3.67% | +2.52% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.70% | 9.28% | +3.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.11% | 11.79% | +4.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.75% | 12.93% | +6.82% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.79% | 12.93% | +14.86% |
MLPQ.L vs. FWRA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
MLPQ.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FWRA.L's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
MLPQ.L vs. FWRA.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither MLPQ.L nor FWRA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
MLPQ.L and FWRA.L have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FWRA.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FWRA.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MLPQ.L.
MLPQ.L is categorized as Energy Equities, while FWRA.L is Global Equities. MLPQ.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while FWRA.L tracks FTSE All-World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MLPQ.L and 0.15% for FWRA.L.
Find the right allocation for MLPQ.L and FWRA.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