PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
PQVM.L vs. IESU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L

Last updated Jul 22, 2026
Documentation

PQVM.L (Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF) and IESU.L (iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - PQVM.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality, Value, and Momentum Multi-Factor Index, while IESU.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Energy Index NTR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PQVM.L returned 14.62%/yr vs 23.12%/yr for IESU.L. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PQVM.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for IESU.L.

Performance

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF (PQVM.L) and iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IESU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

PQVM.L is traded in USD, while IESU.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the IESU.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PQVM.L achieves a 16.05% return, which is significantly lower than IESU.L's 30.79% return.

PQVM.L

1D
1.55%
1M
-3.03%
6M
14.26%
YTD
16.05%
1Y
21.69%
3Y*
21.75%
5Y*
14.62%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
14.69%

IESU.L

1D
0.48%
1M
9.11%
6M
22.95%
YTD
30.79%
1Y
40.23%
3Y*
14.63%
5Y*
23.12%
10Y*
9.01%
ALL TIME*
4.87%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
PQVM.L
Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF		16.05%13.66%30.18%6.81%0.50%26.16%8.04%25.07%-7.29%20.74%
IESU.L
iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		30.79%9.98%3.69%-1.00%63.91%52.43%-33.64%9.60%-18.29%9.11%

Correlation

The correlation between PQVM.L and IESU.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 (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.22

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

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 18, 2017

0.49

Over the past year, the correlation between PQVM.L and IESU.L has dropped to 0.01 - well below their long-term average of 0.49, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
PQVM.L
IESU.L

Technology

32.3%

-

Industrials

21.5%

-

Financial Services

12.5%

-

Energy

11.9%
100.0%

Communication Services

5.1%

-

Consumer Cyclical

5.0%

-

Healthcare

4.9%

-

Basic Materials

4.2%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.1%

-

Utilities

0.3%

-

Real Estate

0.2%

-

Technology

PQVM.L
32.3%
IESU.L

-

Industrials

PQVM.L
21.5%
IESU.L

-

Financial Services

PQVM.L
12.5%
IESU.L

-

Energy

PQVM.L
11.9%
IESU.L
100.0%

Communication Services

PQVM.L
5.1%
IESU.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

PQVM.L
5.0%
IESU.L

-

Healthcare

PQVM.L
4.9%
IESU.L

-

Basic Materials

PQVM.L
4.2%
IESU.L

-

Consumer Defensive

PQVM.L
2.1%
IESU.L

-

Utilities

PQVM.L
0.3%
IESU.L

-

Real Estate

PQVM.L
0.2%
IESU.L

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF

iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

Often compared with PQVM.L:
PQVM.L vs. SPMOPQVM.L vs. VOOPQVM.L vs. UETW.DEPQVM.L vs. WEBN.DEPQVM.L vs. SPYL.LPQVM.L vs. SWDA.LPQVM.L vs. QQQ
Often compared with IESU.L:
IESU.L vs. ISPE.LIESU.L vs. SPXE.LIESU.L vs. IWVU.LIESU.L vs. FLXK.LIESU.L vs. G500.LIESU.L vs. ANRJ.LIESU.L vs. CSP1.L

Return for Risk

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
PQVM.L
PQVM.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
PQVM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PQVM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
PQVM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
PQVM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
PQVM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
IESU.L
IESU.L Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
IESU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IESU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
IESU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
IESU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
IESU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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.

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF (PQVM.L) and iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IESU.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.

PQVM.LIESU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.64
1.68

-0.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.37
2.17

+0.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.29

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.43

2.45

+0.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.31

6.22

+6.09

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PQVM.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is comparable to the IESU.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PQVM.L and IESU.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

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PQVM.L drawdown since its inception was -34.42%, smaller than the maximum IESU.L drawdown of -72.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PQVM.L and IESU.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

PQVM.LIESU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.42%

-72.57%

+38.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.29%

-16.37%

+10.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.49%

-22.55%

+7.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.34%

-27.74%

+10.40%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-66.85%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.46%

-7.28%

+2.82%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.89%

-24.87%

+20.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.76%

6.45%

-4.69%

Volatility

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF (PQVM.L) has a higher volatility of 7.47% compared to iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IESU.L) at 6.92%. This indicates that PQVM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IESU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

PQVM.LIESU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.47%

6.92%

+0.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.44%

21.06%

-9.62%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.18%

23.90%

-10.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.30%

29.35%

-13.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.14%

29.82%

-12.68%

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

PQVM.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than IESU.L's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

PQVM.L vs. IESU.L - Dividend Comparison

PQVM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.81%, while IESU.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
IESU.L
iShares S&P 500 Energy Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
PQVM.L
Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF		0.81%0.82%0.84%1.58%1.79%0.89%1.48%1.38%1.33%0.71%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

IESU.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for PQVM.L.

PQVM.L is categorized as S&P 500, while IESU.L is Energy Equities. PQVM.L tracks S&P 500 Quality, Value, and Momentum Multi-Factor Index, while IESU.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Energy Index NTR. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for PQVM.L and 0.15% for IESU.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PQVM.L and IESU.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