MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MXWS.L (Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF) and FCSG.L (First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation) are both Global Equities funds tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, from Invesco and First Trust respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MXWS.L returned 13.12%/yr vs 5.92%/yr for FCSG.L. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MXWS.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FCSG.L.

Performance

MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF (MXWS.L) and First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation (FCSG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MXWS.L achieves a 10.17% return, which is significantly higher than FCSG.L's -1.69% return.

MXWS.L

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 5.20%
• YTD: 10.17%
• 6M: 10.37%
• 1Y: 27.42%
• 3Y*: 17.75%
• 5Y*: 13.12%
• 10Y*: 14.18%

FCSG.L

• 1D: 0.72%
• 1M: 1.84%
• YTD: -1.69%
• 6M: -1.06%
• 1Y: -0.11%
• 3Y*: 6.29%
• 5Y*: 5.92%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MXWS.L Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF	10.17%	12.63%	21.11%	17.73%	-8.30%	21.33%
FCSG.L First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation	-1.69%	3.93%	11.42%	6.17%	-3.68%	23.55%

Correlation

The correlation between MXWS.L and FCSG.L is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.58
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 11, 2021	0.68

Over the past year, the correlation between MXWS.L and FCSG.L has dropped to 0.39 - well below their long-term average of 0.68, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MXWS.L	FCSG.L
Technology	28.3%	14.0%
Financial Services	15.7%	29.4%
Industrials	11.4%	17.7%
Consumer Cyclical	9.3%	4.0%
Communication Services	9.3%	3.8%
Healthcare	8.8%	5.7%
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	20.9%
Energy	4.2%	-
Basic Materials	3.3%	4.6%
Utilities	2.7%	-
Real Estate	1.9%	-

Return for Risk

MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MXWS.L

MXWS.L Risk / Return Rank: 83
MXWS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
MXWS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
MXWS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 84
MXWS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
MXWS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 83

FCSG.L

FCSG.L Risk / Return Rank: 9
FCSG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
FCSG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
FCSG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8
FCSG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
FCSG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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.

MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF (MXWS.L) and First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation (FCSG.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.

	MXWS.L	FCSG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.69	-0.01	+2.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.68	0.04	+3.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.01	+0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.17	-0.01	+4.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.68	-0.04	+16.71
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MXWS.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.69, which is higher than the FCSG.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MXWS.L and FCSG.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MXWS.L	FCSG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.69	-0.01	+2.70
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98	0.55	+0.43
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	1.07	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.00	0.67	+0.32

Drawdowns

MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MXWS.L drawdown since its inception was -24.29%, which is greater than FCSG.L's maximum drawdown of -11.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MXWS.L and FCSG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	MXWS.L	FCSG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.29%	-11.39%	-12.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.55%	-7.80%	+1.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.29%	-9.70%	-9.59%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.29%	-11.39%	-7.90%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.13%	-4.95%	+4.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.25%	-2.65%	-0.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.64%	3.12%	-1.48%

Volatility

MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI World UCITS ETF (MXWS.L) is 2.51%, while First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A Accumulation (FCSG.L) has a volatility of 2.83%. This indicates that MXWS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCSG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MXWS.L	FCSG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.51%	2.83%	-0.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.41%	6.95%	+0.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.16%	8.82%	+1.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.33%	10.70%	+2.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.45%	10.67%	+4.78%

MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MXWS.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than FCSG.L's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

MXWS.L vs. FCSG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MXWS.L nor FCSG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MXWS.L and FCSG.L in my portfolio?

MXWS.L and FCSG.L have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MXWS.L or FCSG.L?

On fees, MXWS.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MXWS.L or FCSG.L?

MXWS.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FCSG.L.

What is the main difference between MXWS.L and FCSG.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI ACWI NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for MXWS.L and 0.75% for FCSG.L.