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

Performance

XDWH.DE vs. CBUF.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.DE) and iShares MSCI World Health Care Sector ESG UCITS ETF USD Dist (CBUF.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XDWH.DE achieves a -1.98% return, which is significantly higher than CBUF.DE's -2.22% return.


XDWH.DE

1D
2.85%
1M
3.94%
YTD
-1.98%
6M
-1.54%
1Y
9.60%
3Y*
2.67%
5Y*
5.50%
10Y*
7.61%

CBUF.DE

1D
2.74%
1M
3.91%
YTD
-2.22%
6M
-1.50%
1Y
7.40%
3Y*
0.62%
5Y*
4.66%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
XDWH.DE
Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C
-1.98%2.21%7.44%0.04%-0.07%30.55%2.69%11.17%
CBUF.DE
iShares MSCI World Health Care Sector ESG UCITS ETF USD Dist
-2.22%2.56%0.75%0.33%2.09%30.42%2.79%11.42%

Correlation

The correlation between XDWH.DE and CBUF.DE 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

0.95

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

0.97

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 23, 2019

0.97

The correlation between XDWH.DE and CBUF.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

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

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

XDWH.DE
XDWH.DE Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
XDWH.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDWH.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDWH.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
XDWH.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDWH.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

CBUF.DE
CBUF.DE Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
CBUF.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CBUF.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
CBUF.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
CBUF.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
CBUF.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.DE) and iShares MSCI World Health Care Sector ESG UCITS ETF USD Dist (CBUF.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.


XDWH.DECBUF.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.10

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.93

0.68

+0.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.28

1.56

+0.72

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

The current XDWH.DE Sharpe Ratio is 0.70, which is higher than the CBUF.DE Sharpe Ratio of 0.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDWH.DE and CBUF.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XDWH.DECBUF.DEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.70

0.53

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

0.34

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.51

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.55

0.44

+0.11

Drawdowns

XDWH.DE vs. CBUF.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDWH.DE drawdown since its inception was -26.08%, roughly equal to the maximum CBUF.DE drawdown of -25.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDWH.DE and CBUF.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XDWH.DECBUF.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.08%

-25.94%

-0.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.32%

-10.87%

+0.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.12%

-21.76%

+0.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.12%

-21.76%

+0.64%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-26.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.51%

-9.66%

+1.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.82%

-5.65%

+0.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.20%

4.74%

-0.54%

Volatility

XDWH.DE vs. CBUF.DE - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.DE) and iShares MSCI World Health Care Sector ESG UCITS ETF USD Dist (CBUF.DE) have volatilities of 4.81% and 4.98%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XDWH.DECBUF.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.81%

4.98%

-0.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.51%

9.70%

-0.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.69%

13.98%

-0.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.43%

13.60%

-0.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.69%

15.36%

-0.67%

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

XDWH.DE has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than CBUF.DE's 0.18% 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

XDWH.DE vs. CBUF.DE - Dividend Comparison

XDWH.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CBUF.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
CBUF.DE
iShares MSCI World Health Care Sector ESG UCITS ETF USD Dist
1.08%1.06%1.02%1.16%1.09%1.05%1.27%0.10%
XDWH.DE
Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.97, XDWH.DE and CBUF.DE 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, CBUF.DE is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CBUF.DE is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDWH.DE.

XDWH.DE tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD, while CBUF.DE tracks MSCI World Health Care ESG Reduced Carbon Select 20 35 Capped. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XDWH.DE and 0.18% for CBUF.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XDWH.DE and CBUF.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