PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
TRIA.L vs. EQGB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

TRIA.L vs. EQGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF (TRIA.L) and Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TRIA.L achieves a 1.88% return, which is significantly lower than EQGB.L's 15.85% return.


TRIA.L

1D
0.05%
1M
0.34%
6M
1.77%
YTD
1.88%
1Y
4.06%
3Y*
4.67%
5Y*
3.35%
10Y*

EQGB.L

1D
0.42%
1M
-2.55%
6M
16.22%
YTD
15.85%
1Y
28.84%
3Y*
24.58%
5Y*
13.69%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
TRIA.L
Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF
1.88%4.33%5.17%4.97%0.53%-0.00%1.10%
EQGB.L
Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc
15.85%28.61%24.02%62.04%-42.01%26.53%45.16%

Correlation

The correlation between TRIA.L and EQGB.L is -0.02, 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

-0.02

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.06

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

0.05

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2020

0.03

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

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

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

TRIA.L
TRIA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
TRIA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TRIA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
TRIA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
TRIA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
TRIA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

EQGB.L
EQGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
EQGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF (TRIA.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.


TRIA.LEQGB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.53

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.71

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.44

1.25

+1.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.28

1.92

+1.36

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.26

6.69

+2.57

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

The current TRIA.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.99, which is higher than the EQGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TRIA.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

TRIA.L vs. EQGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TRIA.L drawdown since its inception was -1.22%, smaller than the maximum EQGB.L drawdown of -47.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TRIA.L and EQGB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TRIA.LEQGB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.22%

-47.56%

+46.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.22%

-14.96%

+13.74%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.22%

-22.21%

+20.99%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-1.22%

-47.56%

+46.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-3.38%

+3.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.09%

-9.44%

+9.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.43%

4.30%

-3.87%

Volatility

TRIA.L vs. EQGB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF (TRIA.L) is 0.13%, while Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L) has a volatility of 6.39%. This indicates that TRIA.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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


TRIA.LEQGB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.13%

6.39%

-6.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.99%

15.70%

-13.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.01%

19.67%

-17.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

1.01%

24.96%

-23.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

0.93%

24.73%

-23.80%

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

TRIA.L has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than EQGB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

TRIA.L vs. EQGB.L - Dividend Comparison

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


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
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%
TRIA.L
Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


TRIA.L and EQGB.L have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, TRIA.L is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

TRIA.L is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for EQGB.L.

TRIA.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while EQGB.L is Nasdaq-100. TRIA.L tracks Invesco US Treasury Bond 0-1 Year UCITS ETF, while EQGB.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for TRIA.L and 0.35% for EQGB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for TRIA.L and EQGB.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