PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Discretionary UCITS ETF 1C (XDWC.L) and iShares S&P 500 Consumer Discretionary Sector UCITS ETF USD Accumulating (IUCD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XDWC.L achieves a -2.34% return, which is significantly lower than IUCD.L's -1.04% return. Over the past 10 years, XDWC.L has underperformed IUCD.L with an annualized return of 11.05%, while IUCD.L has yielded a comparatively higher 12.91% annualized return.


XDWC.L

1D
0.79%
1M
-0.23%
YTD
-2.34%
6M
-1.21%
1Y
8.42%
3Y*
12.88%
5Y*
4.85%
10Y*
11.05%

IUCD.L

1D
0.39%
1M
-1.36%
YTD
-1.04%
6M
0.51%
1Y
11.87%
3Y*
16.99%
5Y*
8.11%
10Y*
12.91%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XDWC.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Discretionary UCITS ETF 1C
-2.34%7.36%22.22%35.93%-33.50%17.39%37.11%25.92%-6.13%23.78%
IUCD.L
iShares S&P 500 Consumer Discretionary Sector UCITS ETF USD Accumulating
-1.04%6.62%30.82%43.62%-37.19%24.43%33.47%26.85%0.18%21.18%

Correlation

The correlation between XDWC.L and IUCD.L is 0.97 - 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

0.97

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

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2016

0.91

The correlation between XDWC.L and IUCD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XDWC.L
IUCD.L

Consumer Cyclical

96.3%
97.7%

Technology

2.9%
0.8%

Consumer Defensive

0.6%

-

Communication Services

0.1%
1.2%

Industrials

0.1%
0.1%

Basic Materials

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

XDWC.L
96.3%
IUCD.L
97.7%

Technology

XDWC.L
2.9%
IUCD.L
0.8%

Consumer Defensive

XDWC.L
0.6%
IUCD.L

-

Communication Services

XDWC.L
0.1%
IUCD.L
1.2%

Industrials

XDWC.L
0.1%
IUCD.L
0.1%

Basic Materials

XDWC.L

-

IUCD.L

-

Energy

XDWC.L

-

IUCD.L

-

Financial Services

XDWC.L

-

IUCD.L

-

Healthcare

XDWC.L

-

IUCD.L

-

Real Estate

XDWC.L

-

IUCD.L

-

Utilities

XDWC.L

-

IUCD.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

XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XDWC.L
XDWC.L Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
XDWC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDWC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDWC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
XDWC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDWC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

IUCD.L
IUCD.L Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
IUCD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IUCD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
IUCD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
IUCD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
IUCD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
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.

XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Discretionary UCITS ETF 1C (XDWC.L) and iShares S&P 500 Consumer Discretionary Sector UCITS ETF USD Accumulating (IUCD.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.


XDWC.LIUCD.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.12

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.52

0.80

-0.27

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.57

2.40

-0.83

XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDWC.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.48, which is comparable to the IUCD.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDWC.L and IUCD.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


XDWC.LIUCD.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.48

0.64

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.23

0.35

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.56

0.65

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.57

0.62

-0.05

Drawdowns

XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDWC.L drawdown since its inception was -37.26%, smaller than the maximum IUCD.L drawdown of -40.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDWC.L and IUCD.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XDWC.LIUCD.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.26%

-40.70%

+3.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.08%

-14.86%

-1.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.36%

-26.70%

+3.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.26%

-40.70%

+3.44%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.26%

-40.70%

+3.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.67%

-4.75%

-0.92%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.31%

-9.72%

+1.41%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.34%

4.93%

+0.41%

Volatility

XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Discretionary UCITS ETF 1C (XDWC.L) is 5.79%, while iShares S&P 500 Consumer Discretionary Sector UCITS ETF USD Accumulating (IUCD.L) has a volatility of 6.25%. This indicates that XDWC.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IUCD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XDWC.LIUCD.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.79%

6.25%

-0.46%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.82%

14.31%

-0.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.58%

18.42%

-0.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.06%

22.91%

-1.85%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.68%

22.36%

-2.68%

XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDWC.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than IUCD.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

XDWC.L vs. IUCD.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XDWC.L nor IUCD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.97, XDWC.L and IUCD.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, IUCD.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IUCD.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDWC.L.

XDWC.L tracks Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR, while IUCD.L tracks S&P 500 Capped 35/20 Consumer Discretionary Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XDWC.L and 0.15% for IUCD.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XDWC.L and IUCD.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