PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF (MOAT.L) and Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D (XZMD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MOAT.L achieves a -2.67% return, which is significantly lower than XZMD.L's 8.86% return.


MOAT.L

1D
1.08%
1M
1.82%
YTD
-2.67%
6M
-3.13%
1Y
8.27%
3Y*
8.16%
5Y*
3.18%
10Y*
10.55%

XZMD.L

1D
0.76%
1M
2.79%
YTD
8.86%
6M
9.17%
1Y
25.30%
3Y*
22.70%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
MOAT.L
VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF
-2.67%7.34%11.12%18.37%-4.77%
XZMD.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D
8.86%15.91%26.20%29.82%-9.60%

Correlation

The correlation between MOAT.L and XZMD.L is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.35

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

0.38

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 3, 2022

0.52

The correlation between MOAT.L and XZMD.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (1 year) to 0.52 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MOAT.L
XZMD.L

Technology

24.3%
37.2%

Healthcare

23.2%
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

18.1%
1.3%

Industrials

8.8%
8.7%

Consumer Cyclical

7.4%
9.8%

Financial Services

7.4%
12.7%

Communication Services

6.2%
15.0%

Basic Materials

4.2%
1.6%

Real Estate

0.5%
2.7%

Energy

-

0.1%

Utilities

-

0.3%

Technology

MOAT.L
24.3%
XZMD.L
37.2%

Healthcare

MOAT.L
23.2%
XZMD.L
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

MOAT.L
18.1%
XZMD.L
1.3%

Industrials

MOAT.L
8.8%
XZMD.L
8.7%

Consumer Cyclical

MOAT.L
7.4%
XZMD.L
9.8%

Financial Services

MOAT.L
7.4%
XZMD.L
12.7%

Communication Services

MOAT.L
6.2%
XZMD.L
15.0%

Basic Materials

MOAT.L
4.2%
XZMD.L
1.6%

Real Estate

MOAT.L
0.5%
XZMD.L
2.7%

Energy

MOAT.L

-

XZMD.L
0.1%

Utilities

MOAT.L

-

XZMD.L
0.3%

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

MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MOAT.L
MOAT.L Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
MOAT.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MOAT.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
MOAT.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
MOAT.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
MOAT.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

XZMD.L
XZMD.L Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
XZMD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XZMD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
XZMD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
XZMD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
XZMD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
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.

MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF (MOAT.L) and Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D (XZMD.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.


MOAT.LXZMD.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-4.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.64

-0.53

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.70

6.91

-6.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.89

25.04

-23.15

MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MOAT.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.61, which is lower than the XZMD.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MOAT.L and XZMD.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


MOAT.LXZMD.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.61

3.70

-3.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.19

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.66

1.45

-0.79

Drawdowns

MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MOAT.L drawdown since its inception was -32.78%, which is greater than XZMD.L's maximum drawdown of -20.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOAT.L and XZMD.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MOAT.LXZMD.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.78%

-20.62%

-12.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.86%

-11.61%

-0.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.84%

-20.62%

-1.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.02%

-0.33%

-4.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.58%

-4.83%

-0.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.42%

5.37%

-0.95%

Volatility

MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF (MOAT.L) has a higher volatility of 3.79% compared to Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D (XZMD.L) at 3.53%. This indicates that MOAT.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XZMD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MOAT.LXZMD.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.79%

3.53%

+0.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.62%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.79%

21.75%

-7.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.32%

24.27%

-7.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.93%

24.27%

-7.34%

MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MOAT.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than XZMD.L's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

MOAT.L vs. XZMD.L - Dividend Comparison

MOAT.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XZMD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.68%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
MOAT.L
VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XZMD.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D
0.68%0.79%0.95%0.95%0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions


MOAT.L and XZMD.L have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

XZMD.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for MOAT.L.

Both ETFs track Russell 1000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MOAT.L and 0.15% for XZMD.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MOAT.L and XZMD.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