PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XDWH.L vs. XMJP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XDWH.L vs. XMJP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C (XMJP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XDWH.L achieves a -2.74% return, which is significantly lower than XMJP.L's 16.17% return. Over the past 10 years, XDWH.L has underperformed XMJP.L with an annualized return of 7.85%, while XMJP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 9.46% annualized return.


XDWH.L

1D
2.99%
1M
3.25%
YTD
-2.74%
6M
-1.64%
1Y
11.56%
3Y*
5.50%
5Y*
4.54%
10Y*
7.85%

XMJP.L

1D
-0.21%
1M
5.36%
YTD
16.17%
6M
16.42%
1Y
32.87%
3Y*
18.61%
5Y*
9.07%
10Y*
9.46%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XDWH.L vs. XMJP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XDWH.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C
-2.74%15.25%0.75%3.81%-5.42%20.56%12.88%22.95%1.57%20.16%
XMJP.L
Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C
16.17%26.35%7.32%19.88%-17.03%1.19%15.78%18.95%-13.82%23.97%

Correlation

The correlation between XDWH.L and XMJP.L is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.39

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

0.38

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

0.43

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

0.49

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

0.48

The correlation between XDWH.L and XMJP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (3 years) to 0.49 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XDWH.L vs. XMJP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XDWH.L
XMJP.L

Healthcare

98.9%
6.3%

Consumer Defensive

0.5%
3.6%

Basic Materials

-

3.0%

Communication Services

-

7.9%

Consumer Cyclical

-

12.2%

Energy

-

1.1%

Financial Services

-

17.5%

Industrials

-

26.0%

Real Estate

-

2.3%

Technology

-

19.1%

Utilities

-

1.1%

Healthcare

XDWH.L
98.9%
XMJP.L
6.3%

Consumer Defensive

XDWH.L
0.5%
XMJP.L
3.6%

Basic Materials

XDWH.L

-

XMJP.L
3.0%

Communication Services

XDWH.L

-

XMJP.L
7.9%

Consumer Cyclical

XDWH.L

-

XMJP.L
12.2%

Energy

XDWH.L

-

XMJP.L
1.1%

Financial Services

XDWH.L

-

XMJP.L
17.5%

Industrials

XDWH.L

-

XMJP.L
26.0%

Real Estate

XDWH.L

-

XMJP.L
2.3%

Technology

XDWH.L

-

XMJP.L
19.1%

Utilities

XDWH.L

-

XMJP.L
1.1%

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.L vs. XMJP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XDWH.L
XDWH.L Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank

XMJP.L
XMJP.L Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
XMJP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMJP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMJP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
XMJP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMJP.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.

XDWH.L vs. XMJP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C (XMJP.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.


XDWH.LXMJP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.84

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.16

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.31

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.11

2.55

-1.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.80

8.44

-5.63

XDWH.L vs. XMJP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.79, which is lower than the XMJP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDWH.L and XMJP.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


XDWH.LXMJP.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.79

1.64

-0.84

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.32

0.50

-0.18

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

0.56

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.57

0.26

+0.31

Drawdowns

XDWH.L vs. XMJP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDWH.L drawdown since its inception was -26.24%, smaller than the maximum XMJP.L drawdown of -51.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDWH.L and XMJP.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XDWH.LXMJP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.24%

-51.49%

+25.25%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.39%

-12.82%

+2.43%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.28%

-14.93%

-4.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.28%

-32.63%

+13.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-26.24%

-32.63%

+6.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.82%

-0.21%

-5.61%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.98%

-13.33%

+8.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.12%

3.89%

+0.23%

Volatility

XDWH.L vs. XMJP.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L) has a higher volatility of 4.80% compared to Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C (XMJP.L) at 4.54%. This indicates that XDWH.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMJP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XDWH.LXMJP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.80%

4.54%

+0.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.77%

16.10%

-5.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.57%

20.00%

-5.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.18%

18.00%

-3.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.97%

17.02%

-2.05%

XDWH.L vs. XMJP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDWH.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XMJP.L's 0.20% 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.L vs. XMJP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XDWH.L nor XMJP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XDWH.L and XMJP.L have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMJP.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMJP.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDWH.L.

XDWH.L is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while XMJP.L is Japan Equities. XDWH.L tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD, while XMJP.L tracks TOPIX TR JPY. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XDWH.L and 0.20% for XMJP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XDWH.L and XMJP.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