SPPP.L vs. FTWG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SPPP.L (Invesco Physical Platinum) and FTWG.L (Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist) are both exchange-traded funds - SPPP.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Platinum, while FTWG.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the FTSE All-World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, SPPP.L returned 74.71% vs 30.16% for FTWG.L. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SPPP.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FTWG.L.

Performance

SPPP.L vs. FTWG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco Physical Platinum (SPPP.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SPPP.L achieves a -5.12% return, which is significantly lower than FTWG.L's 11.87% return.

SPPP.L

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: -3.04%
• YTD: -5.12%
• 6M: 13.96%
• 1Y: 74.71%
• 3Y*: 17.70%
• 5Y*: 11.26%
• 10Y*: 7.15%

FTWG.L

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 5.38%
• YTD: 11.87%
• 6M: 12.43%
• 1Y: 30.16%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SPPP.L vs. FTWG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SPPP.L Invesco Physical Platinum	-5.12%	104.81%	-8.43%	8.74%
FTWG.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist	11.87%	14.12%	19.92%	7.22%

Correlation

The correlation between SPPP.L and FTWG.L is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023	0.20

Return for Risk

SPPP.L vs. FTWG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPPP.L

SPPP.L Risk / Return Rank: 41
SPPP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
SPPP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
SPPP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 45
SPPP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
SPPP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 32

FTWG.L

FTWG.L Risk / Return Rank: 86
FTWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
FTWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
FTWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 89
FTWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
FTWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

SPPP.L vs. FTWG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Physical Platinum (SPPP.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.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.

	SPPP.L	FTWG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	2.92	-1.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.96	4.01	-2.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.56	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.21	4.23	-2.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.60	17.22	-12.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SPPP.L vs. FTWG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPPP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is lower than the FTWG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPPP.L and FTWG.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

	SPPP.L	FTWG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.57	2.92	-1.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.36	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.24	1.55	-1.30

Drawdowns

SPPP.L vs. FTWG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPPP.L drawdown since its inception was -44.86%, which is greater than FTWG.L's maximum drawdown of -17.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPPP.L and FTWG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	SPPP.L	FTWG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.86%	-17.78%	-27.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-33.68%	-7.11%	-26.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.68%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.68%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.86%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-32.01%	-0.42%	-31.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.87%	-1.99%	-16.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.21%	1.75%	+14.46%

Volatility

SPPP.L vs. FTWG.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Physical Platinum (SPPP.L) has a higher volatility of 10.55% compared to Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.L) at 3.04%. This indicates that SPPP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FTWG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SPPP.L	FTWG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.55%	3.04%	+7.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	41.83%	7.59%	+34.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.25%	10.28%	+36.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	40.09%	11.89%	+28.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.97%	11.89%	+25.08%

SPPP.L vs. FTWG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

SPPP.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than FTWG.L's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

SPPP.L vs. FTWG.L - Dividend Comparison

SPPP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FTWG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.22%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FTWG.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist	1.22%	1.34%	1.50%	0.70%
SPPP.L Invesco Physical Platinum	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SPPP.L and FTWG.L in my portfolio?

SPPP.L and FTWG.L have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, SPPP.L or FTWG.L?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, SPPP.L or FTWG.L?

FTWG.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for SPPP.L.

What is the main difference between SPPP.L and FTWG.L?

SPPP.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while FTWG.L is Global Equities. SPPP.L tracks Platinum, while FTWG.L tracks FTSE All-World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for SPPP.L and 0.15% for FTWG.L.