PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XCS2.DE vs. XDWH.DE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XCS2.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Xtrackers II Australia Government Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (XCS2.DE) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCS2.DE achieves a 8.74% return, which is significantly higher than XDWH.DE's 6.77% return. Over the past 10 years, XCS2.DE has underperformed XDWH.DE with an annualized return of -0.09%, while XDWH.DE has yielded a comparatively higher 8.35% annualized return.


XCS2.DE

1D
0.64%
1M
0.17%
6M
8.57%
YTD
8.74%
1Y
9.20%
3Y*
2.45%
5Y*
-1.91%
10Y*
-0.09%

XDWH.DE

1D
-0.04%
1M
12.02%
6M
7.05%
YTD
6.77%
1Y
22.07%
3Y*
6.34%
5Y*
5.87%
10Y*
8.35%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCS2.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XCS2.DE
Xtrackers II Australia Government Bond UCITS ETF (Acc)
8.74%-2.17%-1.70%0.78%-13.88%-0.26%4.13%9.65%-0.82%-2.48%
XDWH.DE
Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C
6.77%2.20%7.45%0.04%0.11%30.30%2.70%27.21%5.98%5.52%

Correlation

The correlation between XCS2.DE and XDWH.DE is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.19

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

0.25

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

0.25

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.28

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 22, 2010

0.22

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

XCS2.DE vs. XDWH.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCS2.DE
XCS2.DE Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
XCS2.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCS2.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCS2.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 3232
Omega Ratio Rank
XCS2.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCS2.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank

XDWH.DE
XDWH.DE Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
XDWH.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDWH.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDWH.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
XDWH.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDWH.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
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.

XCS2.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers II Australia Government Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (XCS2.DE) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.DE). 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.


XCS2.DEXDWH.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.51

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.28

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.01

2.24

-0.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.68

5.74

+0.93

XCS2.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCS2.DE Sharpe Ratio is 1.04, which is lower than the XDWH.DE Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCS2.DE and XDWH.DE, 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

XCS2.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCS2.DE drawdown since its inception was -41.58%, roughly equal to the maximum XDWH.DE drawdown of -40.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCS2.DE and XDWH.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XCS2.DEXDWH.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.58%

-40.65%

-0.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.56%

-9.82%

+5.26%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.00%

-21.11%

+9.11%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.36%

-21.11%

-1.25%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.58%

-26.06%

-15.52%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-32.78%

-0.35%

-32.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-25.75%

-7.34%

-18.41%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.37%

3.83%

-2.46%

Volatility

XCS2.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers II Australia Government Bond UCITS ETF (Acc) (XCS2.DE) is 2.20%, while Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.DE) has a volatility of 4.52%. This indicates that XCS2.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XDWH.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XCS2.DEXDWH.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.20%

4.52%

-2.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.40%

10.23%

-2.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.80%

14.17%

-5.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.13%

13.51%

-3.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.02%

15.62%

+5.40%

XCS2.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both XCS2.DE and XDWH.DE have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

XCS2.DE vs. XDWH.DE - Dividend Comparison

Neither XCS2.DE nor XDWH.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XCS2.DE and XDWH.DE have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XCS2.DE and XDWH.DE have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.

XCS2.DE is categorized as Government Bonds, while XDWH.DE is Health & Biotech Equities. XCS2.DE tracks FTSE Australian Government Bond Index, while XDWH.DE tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XCS2.DE and XDWH.DE

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