PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MSAP.L vs. EQGB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MSAP.L vs. EQGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Saudi Arabia ETF (MSAP.L) and Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSAP.L achieves a 3.41% return, which is significantly lower than EQGB.L's 15.19% return.


MSAP.L

1D
-0.28%
1M
-3.59%
6M
-2.38%
YTD
3.41%
1Y
1.98%
3Y*
-1.62%
5Y*
2.40%
10Y*

EQGB.L

1D
-0.71%
1M
-3.43%
6M
15.41%
YTD
15.19%
1Y
27.37%
3Y*
23.21%
5Y*
14.06%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MSAP.L vs. EQGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
MSAP.L
Invesco MSCI Saudi Arabia ETF
3.41%-12.17%1.88%3.56%6.09%37.74%-2.87%2.76%-24.41%
EQGB.L
Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc
15.19%19.59%26.12%53.92%-35.07%27.68%45.43%41.84%-12.32%

Correlation

The correlation between MSAP.L and EQGB.L is 0.09, 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

0.09

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

0.15

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.13

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2018

0.17

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

MSAP.L vs. EQGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MSAP.L
MSAP.L Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
MSAP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MSAP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
MSAP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
MSAP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
MSAP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

EQGB.L
EQGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
EQGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
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.

MSAP.L vs. EQGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Saudi Arabia ETF (MSAP.L) and Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


MSAP.LEQGB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.04

1.28

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.22

2.41

-2.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.50

8.06

-7.55

MSAP.L vs. EQGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSAP.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.19, which is lower than the EQGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSAP.L and EQGB.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...

Drawdowns

MSAP.L vs. EQGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSAP.L drawdown since its inception was -46.44%, which is greater than EQGB.L's maximum drawdown of -36.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSAP.L and EQGB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MSAP.LEQGB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.44%

-36.77%

-9.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.24%

-11.33%

-0.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.20%

-22.76%

+2.56%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.35%

-36.77%

+6.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-25.14%

-3.88%

-21.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.39%

-7.40%

-11.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.44%

3.39%

+2.05%

Volatility

MSAP.L vs. EQGB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Saudi Arabia ETF (MSAP.L) is 3.63%, while Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L) has a volatility of 5.88%. This indicates that MSAP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EQGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MSAP.LEQGB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.63%

5.88%

-2.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.87%

13.78%

-3.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.67%

17.33%

-2.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.68%

21.20%

-5.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.32%

21.26%

-0.94%

MSAP.L vs. EQGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSAP.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than EQGB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

MSAP.L vs. EQGB.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MSAP.L nor EQGB.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
EQGB.L
Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%4.16%
MSAP.L
Invesco MSCI Saudi Arabia ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MSAP.L and EQGB.L have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

EQGB.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MSAP.L.

MSAP.L is categorized as Global Equities, while EQGB.L is Nasdaq-100. MSAP.L tracks Invesco MSCI Saudi Arabia ETF, while EQGB.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MSAP.L and 0.35% for EQGB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MSAP.L and EQGB.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