XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XDWM.L (Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C) and XLIP.L (Invesco US Industrials Sector UCITS ETF) are both Industrials Equities funds tracking the MSCI World/Materials NR USD, from Xtrackers and Invesco respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XDWM.L returned 10.95%/yr vs 13.30%/yr for XLIP.L. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XDWM.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLIP.L.

Performance

XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C (XDWM.L) and Invesco US Industrials Sector UCITS ETF (XLIP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XDWM.L achieves a 15.43% return, which is significantly higher than XLIP.L's 12.46% return. Over the past 10 years, XDWM.L has underperformed XLIP.L with an annualized return of 10.95%, while XLIP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.30% annualized return.

XDWM.L

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: 3.35%
• YTD: 15.43%
• 6M: 20.04%
• 1Y: 32.13%
• 3Y*: 15.48%
• 5Y*: 6.89%
• 10Y*: 10.95%

XLIP.L

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 1.72%
• YTD: 12.46%
• 6M: 13.90%
• 1Y: 23.16%
• 3Y*: 21.84%
• 5Y*: 12.21%
• 10Y*: 13.30%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XDWM.L Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C	15.43%	26.77%	-6.34%	14.84%	-10.00%	15.53%	19.91%	23.00%	-16.57%	25.06%
XLIP.L Invesco US Industrials Sector UCITS ETF	12.46%	19.50%	17.29%	17.44%	-5.22%	20.97%	9.42%	29.83%	-14.53%	20.00%

Correlation

The correlation between XDWM.L and XLIP.L is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.54
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 13, 2016	0.51

The correlation between XDWM.L and XLIP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (all time) to 0.66 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XDWM.L	XLIP.L
Basic Materials	94.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	4.2%	1.3%
Technology	0.6%	1.3%
Consumer Defensive	0.4%	-
Industrials	0.4%	96.3%
Communication Services	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	1.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XDWM.L

XDWM.L Risk / Return Rank: 47
XDWM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
XDWM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
XDWM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 46
XDWM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
XDWM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 48

XLIP.L

XLIP.L Risk / Return Rank: 52
XLIP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
XLIP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
XLIP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 52
XLIP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
XLIP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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.

XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C (XDWM.L) and Invesco US Industrials Sector UCITS ETF (XLIP.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.

	XDWM.L	XLIP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.66	1.65	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.33	2.53	-0.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.28	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.08	2.12	-0.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.00	8.34	-0.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDWM.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is comparable to the XLIP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDWM.L and XLIP.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XDWM.L	XLIP.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.66	1.65	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35	0.72	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.71	0.70	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.73	0.62	+0.11

Drawdowns

XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDWM.L drawdown since its inception was -37.37%, smaller than the maximum XLIP.L drawdown of -41.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDWM.L and XLIP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XDWM.L	XLIP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.37%	-41.72%	+4.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.35%	-10.85%	-4.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.45%	-19.78%	-1.67%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.07%	-21.91%	-6.16%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.37%	-41.72%	+4.35%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.42%	-1.23%	-2.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.28%	-4.81%	-2.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.01%	2.77%	+1.24%

Volatility

XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C (XDWM.L) has a higher volatility of 7.56% compared to Invesco US Industrials Sector UCITS ETF (XLIP.L) at 4.55%. This indicates that XDWM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLIP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XDWM.L	XLIP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.56%	4.55%	+3.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.49%	11.15%	+5.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.27%	13.96%	+5.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.72%	17.01%	+2.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.61%	19.06%	+4.55%

XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDWM.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XLIP.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

XDWM.L vs. XLIP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XDWM.L nor XLIP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XDWM.L and XLIP.L in my portfolio?

XDWM.L and XLIP.L have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XDWM.L or XLIP.L?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, XDWM.L or XLIP.L?

XLIP.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDWM.L.

What is the main difference between XDWM.L and XLIP.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI World/Materials NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XDWM.L and 0.14% for XLIP.L.