RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RQFI.L (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D) and XDWH.L (Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - RQFI.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while XDWH.L is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Health Care NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RQFI.L returned 6.41%/yr vs 8.66%/yr for XDWH.L. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RQFI.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XDWH.L.

Performance

RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RQFI.L achieves a 9.58% return, which is significantly higher than XDWH.L's -2.35% return. Over the past 10 years, RQFI.L has underperformed XDWH.L with an annualized return of 6.41%, while XDWH.L has yielded a comparatively higher 8.66% annualized return.

RQFI.L

• 1D: -0.73%
• 1M: 3.28%
• YTD: 9.58%
• 6M: 12.66%
• 1Y: 38.60%
• 3Y*: 9.52%
• 5Y*: -0.04%
• 10Y*: 6.41%

XDWH.L

• 1D: 2.99%
• 1M: 4.20%
• YTD: -2.35%
• 6M: -2.32%
• 1Y: 12.65%
• 3Y*: 2.85%
• 5Y*: 5.67%
• 10Y*: 8.66%

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

RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RQFI.L Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D	9.58%	18.47%	15.28%	-18.09%	-17.88%	-1.05%	33.54%	29.68%	-23.59%	20.20%
XDWH.L Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C	-2.35%	7.04%	2.51%	-1.38%	5.83%	21.71%	9.57%	18.28%	7.59%	9.77%

Correlation

The correlation between RQFI.L and XDWH.L is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.15
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.06
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.08
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 29, 2016	0.22

The correlation between RQFI.L and XDWH.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (3 years) to 0.22 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RQFI.L	XDWH.L
Technology	26.3%	-
Financial Services	20.4%	-
Industrials	16.6%	-
Basic Materials	10.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	7.4%	0.5%
Consumer Cyclical	6.7%	-
Healthcare	4.9%	98.9%
Utilities	3.0%	-
Energy	2.8%	-
Communication Services	0.8%	-
Real Estate	0.5%	-

Return for Risk

RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

RQFI.L

RQFI.L Risk / Return Rank: 84
RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
RQFI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
RQFI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 80
RQFI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
RQFI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 86

XDWH.L

XDWH.L Risk / Return Rank: 24
XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
XDWH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
XDWH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 23
XDWH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
XDWH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 23

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.

RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.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.

	RQFI.L	XDWH.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.65	0.86	+1.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.51	1.35	+2.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.16	+0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.91	1.21	+5.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.89	3.15	+14.74
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is higher than the XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RQFI.L and XDWH.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

	RQFI.L	XDWH.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.65	0.86	+1.78
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.00	0.40	-0.41
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.31	0.56	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.36	0.59	-0.23

Drawdowns

RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RQFI.L drawdown since its inception was -47.55%, which is greater than XDWH.L's maximum drawdown of -18.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RQFI.L and XDWH.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	RQFI.L	XDWH.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.55%	-18.80%	-28.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.69%	-10.43%	+4.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.09%	-18.80%	-6.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.72%	-18.80%	-22.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.36%	-18.80%	-27.56%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.00%	-5.80%	-6.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.37%	-4.41%	-17.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.18%	4.01%	-1.83%

Volatility

RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L) have volatilities of 5.18% and 5.30%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RQFI.L	XDWH.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.18%	5.30%	-0.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.85%	10.98%	-1.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.88%	14.58%	+0.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.40%	14.02%	+7.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.60%	15.50%	+7.10%

RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

RQFI.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XDWH.L's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

RQFI.L vs. XDWH.L - Dividend Comparison

RQFI.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, while XDWH.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RQFI.L Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D	1.44%	1.77%	1.46%	1.99%	1.88%	0.94%	1.26%	0.76%	2.23%	1.92%	1.70%	0.37%
XDWH.L Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RQFI.L and XDWH.L in my portfolio?

RQFI.L and XDWH.L have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RQFI.L or XDWH.L?

On fees, XDWH.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RQFI.L or XDWH.L?

XDWH.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for RQFI.L.

What is the main difference between RQFI.L and XDWH.L?

RQFI.L is categorized as China Equities, while XDWH.L is Health & Biotech Equities. RQFI.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while XDWH.L tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for RQFI.L and 0.25% for XDWH.L.