PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XDW0.L vs. XLES.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XDW0.L vs. XLES.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF 1C (XDW0.L) and Invesco Energy S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLES.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with XDW0.L having a 30.91% return and XLES.L slightly higher at 31.08%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with XDW0.L having a 9.43% annualized return and XLES.L not far behind at 9.33%.


XDW0.L

1D
-0.57%
1M
-1.85%
YTD
30.91%
6M
28.80%
1Y
47.41%
3Y*
18.78%
5Y*
19.19%
10Y*
9.43%

XLES.L

1D
-0.33%
1M
-1.17%
YTD
31.08%
6M
29.05%
1Y
45.84%
3Y*
17.04%
5Y*
20.00%
10Y*
9.33%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XDW0.L vs. XLES.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XDW0.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF 1C
30.91%14.66%2.10%3.69%46.28%39.22%-30.39%10.05%-15.68%5.34%
XLES.L
Invesco Energy S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc
31.08%8.75%3.30%0.37%61.87%52.10%-33.17%10.10%-17.97%-1.57%

Correlation

The correlation between XDW0.L and XLES.L is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.96

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

0.96

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

0.97

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

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 29, 2016

0.96

The correlation between XDW0.L and XLES.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

XDW0.L vs. XLES.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XDW0.L
XLES.L

Energy

99.9%
100.0%

Communication Services

0.1%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Energy

XDW0.L
99.9%
XLES.L
100.0%

Communication Services

XDW0.L
0.1%
XLES.L

-

Basic Materials

XDW0.L

-

XLES.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

XDW0.L

-

XLES.L

-

Consumer Defensive

XDW0.L

-

XLES.L

-

Financial Services

XDW0.L

-

XLES.L

-

Healthcare

XDW0.L

-

XLES.L

-

Industrials

XDW0.L

-

XLES.L

-

Real Estate

XDW0.L

-

XLES.L

-

Technology

XDW0.L

-

XLES.L

-

Utilities

XDW0.L

-

XLES.L

-

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

XDW0.L vs. XLES.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XDW0.L
XDW0.L Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
XDW0.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDW0.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDW0.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
XDW0.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDW0.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank

XLES.L
XLES.L Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
XLES.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLES.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLES.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
XLES.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLES.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

XDW0.L vs. XLES.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF 1C (XDW0.L) and Invesco Energy S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLES.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.


XDW0.LXLES.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.37

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.35

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.89

3.36

+0.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.98

10.46

+2.53

XDW0.L vs. XLES.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDW0.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.46, which is comparable to the XLES.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDW0.L and XLES.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XDW0.LXLES.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.46

2.13

+0.33

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.79

0.75

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.36

0.33

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.39

0.28

+0.11

Drawdowns

XDW0.L vs. XLES.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDW0.L drawdown since its inception was -63.72%, smaller than the maximum XLES.L drawdown of -72.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDW0.L and XLES.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XDW0.LXLES.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-63.72%

-72.10%

+8.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.14%

-13.59%

+1.45%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.90%

-21.36%

+2.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.47%

-28.55%

+2.08%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-63.72%

-67.55%

+3.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.03%

-6.34%

+0.31%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.31%

-20.42%

+8.11%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.64%

4.37%

-0.73%

Volatility

XDW0.L vs. XLES.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF 1C (XDW0.L) is 7.38%, while Invesco Energy S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLES.L) has a volatility of 8.15%. This indicates that XDW0.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLES.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XDW0.LXLES.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.38%

8.15%

-0.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.33%

18.13%

-1.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.23%

21.51%

-2.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.24%

26.88%

-2.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.16%

28.92%

-2.76%

XDW0.L vs. XLES.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDW0.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XLES.L's 0.14% 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

XDW0.L vs. XLES.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XDW0.L nor XLES.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.96, XDW0.L and XLES.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, XLES.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XLES.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDW0.L.

XDW0.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while XLES.L tracks S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XDW0.L and 0.14% for XLES.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XDW0.L and XLES.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