PAWS.L vs. EQGB.L

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

PAWS.L (Invesco MSCI World ESG Climate Paris Aligned UCITS ETF Acc) and EQGB.L (Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - PAWS.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while EQGB.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PAWS.L returned 12.44%/yr vs 25.56%/yr for EQGB.L. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PAWS.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for EQGB.L.

Performance

PAWS.L vs. EQGB.L - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PAWS.L achieves a 5.65% return, which is significantly lower than EQGB.L's 16.09% return.

PAWS.L

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.91%
• YTD: 5.65%
• 6M: 6.18%
• 1Y: 14.12%
• 3Y*: 12.44%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EQGB.L

• 1D: 3.04%
• 1M: 1.57%
• YTD: 16.09%
• 6M: 17.30%
• 1Y: 34.99%
• 3Y*: 25.56%
• 5Y*: 15.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PAWS.L Invesco MSCI World ESG Climate Paris Aligned UCITS ETF Acc	5.65%	7.39%	14.93%	14.95%	-12.42%	7,269.00%
EQGB.L Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc	16.09%	19.59%	26.12%	53.92%	-35.07%	4.32%

Correlation

The correlation between PAWS.L and EQGB.L is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 6, 2021	0.75

The correlation between PAWS.L and EQGB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

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

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

PAWS.L

PAWS.L Risk / Return Rank: 46
PAWS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
PAWS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
PAWS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 100
PAWS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
PAWS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 12

EQGB.L

EQGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 73
EQGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
EQGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
EQGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 72
EQGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
EQGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI World ESG Climate Paris Aligned UCITS ETF Acc (PAWS.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.

	PAWS.L	EQGB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.00	2.12	-2.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	198.25	2.96	+195.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	87.34	1.37	+85.97
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.14	3.07	-2.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.51	10.73	-10.22

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

The current PAWS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.00, which is lower than the EQGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAWS.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.

Drawdowns

PAWS.L vs. EQGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAWS.L drawdown since its inception was -99.03%, 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 PAWS.L and EQGB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAWS.L	EQGB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.03%	-36.77%	-62.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-99.02%	-11.33%	-87.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-99.03%	-22.76%	-76.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-36.77%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.17%	-3.12%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.66%	-7.45%	-0.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	26.63%	3.25%	+23.38%

Volatility

PAWS.L vs. EQGB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI World ESG Climate Paris Aligned UCITS ETF Acc (PAWS.L) is 3.50%, while Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L) has a volatility of 6.25%. This indicates that PAWS.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.

Volatility by Period

	PAWS.L	EQGB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.50%	6.25%	-2.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	653.26%	12.76%	+640.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19,679.03%	16.43%	+19,662.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9,948.20%	21.04%	+9,927.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9,948.20%	21.26%	+9,926.94%

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

PAWS.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than EQGB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

PAWS.L vs. EQGB.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
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%
PAWS.L Invesco MSCI World ESG Climate Paris Aligned UCITS ETF Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAWS.L and EQGB.L in my portfolio?

PAWS.L and EQGB.L have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PAWS.L or EQGB.L?

On fees, PAWS.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, PAWS.L or EQGB.L?

PAWS.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for EQGB.L.

What is the main difference between PAWS.L and EQGB.L?

PAWS.L is categorized as Global Equities, while EQGB.L is Nasdaq-100. PAWS.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while EQGB.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for PAWS.L and 0.35% for EQGB.L.