XDWM.L vs. XNAQ.L
XDWM.L (Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C) and XNAQ.L (Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - XDWM.L is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Materials NR USD, while XNAQ.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XDWM.L returned 6.89%/yr vs 17.71%/yr for XNAQ.L. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XDWM.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XNAQ.L.
Performance
XDWM.L vs. XNAQ.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
XDWM.L is traded in USD, while XNAQ.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the XNAQ.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 lower than XNAQ.L's 19.60% 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%
XNAQ.L
- 1D
- -0.58%
- 1M
- 8.70%
- YTD
- 19.60%
- 6M
- 19.33%
- 1Y
- 40.49%
- 3Y*
- 28.03%
- 5Y*
- 17.71%
- 10Y*
- —
XDWM.L vs. XNAQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XDWM.L Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C | 15.43% | 26.77% | -6.34% | 14.84% | -10.00% | 15.34% |
XNAQ.L Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C | 19.60% | 20.14% | 26.48% | 55.63% | -33.41% | 24.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between XDWM.L and XNAQ.L is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2021 | 0.54 |
The correlation between XDWM.L and XNAQ.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (1 year) to 0.55 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XDWM.L vs. XNAQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XDWM.L
XNAQ.L
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
XDWM.L
XNAQ.L
Consumer Cyclical
XDWM.L
XNAQ.L
Technology
XDWM.L
XNAQ.L
Consumer Defensive
XDWM.L
XNAQ.L
Industrials
XDWM.L
XNAQ.L
Communication Services
XDWM.L
-
XNAQ.L
Energy
XDWM.L
-
XNAQ.L
Financial Services
XDWM.L
-
XNAQ.L
Healthcare
XDWM.L
-
XNAQ.L
Real Estate
XDWM.L
-
XNAQ.L
Utilities
XDWM.L
-
XNAQ.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
XDWM.L vs. XNAQ.L — Risk / Return Rank
XDWM.L
XNAQ.L
XDWM.L vs. XNAQ.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 Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.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 | XNAQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.96 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.45 | -0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.08 | 3.65 | -1.56 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.00 | 13.39 | -5.39 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XDWM.L | XNAQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.66 | 2.62 | -0.96 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.35 | 0.87 | -0.51 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.71 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.73 | 0.85 | -0.11 |
Drawdowns
XDWM.L vs. XNAQ.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XDWM.L drawdown since its inception was -37.37%, which is greater than XNAQ.L's maximum drawdown of -35.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDWM.L and XNAQ.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XDWM.L | XNAQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.37% | -35.12% | -2.25% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.35% | -11.05% | -4.30% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.45% | -23.11% | +1.66% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.07% | -35.12% | +7.05% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -37.37% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.42% | -0.77% | -2.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.28% | -8.65% | +1.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.01% | 3.01% | +1.00% |
Volatility
XDWM.L vs. XNAQ.L - Volatility Comparison
Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C (XDWM.L) has a higher volatility of 7.56% compared to Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L) at 4.38%. This indicates that XDWM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XNAQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XDWM.L | XNAQ.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.56% | 4.38% | +3.18% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.49% | 11.26% | +5.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.27% | 15.37% | +3.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.72% | 20.38% | -0.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.61% | 20.43% | +3.18% |
XDWM.L vs. XNAQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XDWM.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XNAQ.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
XDWM.L vs. XNAQ.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XDWM.L nor XNAQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XDWM.L and XNAQ.L have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XNAQ.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XNAQ.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDWM.L.
XDWM.L is categorized as Industrials Equities, while XNAQ.L is Nasdaq-100. XDWM.L tracks MSCI World/Materials NR USD, while XNAQ.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XDWM.L and 0.20% for XNAQ.L.
Find the right allocation for XDWM.L and XNAQ.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