PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XDWS.L achieves a 3.29% return, which is significantly lower than XLPP.L's 6.20% return. Over the past 10 years, XDWS.L has underperformed XLPP.L with an annualized return of 5.57%, while XLPP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 7.58% annualized return.


XDWS.L

1D
-0.18%
1M
-2.75%
YTD
3.29%
6M
3.85%
1Y
0.79%
3Y*
6.17%
5Y*
3.97%
10Y*
5.57%

XLPP.L

1D
0.15%
1M
-2.75%
YTD
6.20%
6M
6.97%
1Y
2.16%
3Y*
8.27%
5Y*
6.77%
10Y*
7.58%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XDWS.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C
3.29%9.31%5.69%1.96%-5.24%12.84%7.75%22.32%-10.10%17.07%
XLPP.L
Invesco US Consumer Staples Sector UCITS ETF
6.20%4.45%14.06%-0.70%-0.46%18.72%8.70%27.88%-9.57%11.96%

Correlation

The correlation between XDWS.L and XLPP.L is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.88

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

0.84

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

0.83

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

0.81

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

0.81

The correlation between XDWS.L and XLPP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XDWS.L
XLPP.L

Consumer Defensive

97.3%

-

Consumer Cyclical

2.2%
98.8%

Financial Services

0.2%

-

Healthcare

0.2%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Energy

-

-

Industrials

-

0.2%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

1.0%

Utilities

-

-

Consumer Defensive

XDWS.L
97.3%
XLPP.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

XDWS.L
2.2%
XLPP.L
98.8%

Financial Services

XDWS.L
0.2%
XLPP.L

-

Healthcare

XDWS.L
0.2%
XLPP.L

-

Basic Materials

XDWS.L

-

XLPP.L

-

Communication Services

XDWS.L

-

XLPP.L

-

Energy

XDWS.L

-

XLPP.L

-

Industrials

XDWS.L

-

XLPP.L
0.2%

Real Estate

XDWS.L

-

XLPP.L

-

Technology

XDWS.L

-

XLPP.L
1.0%

Utilities

XDWS.L

-

XLPP.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

XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XDWS.L
XDWS.L Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
XDWS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDWS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDWS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
XDWS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1010
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDWS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
Martin Ratio Rank

XLPP.L
XLPP.L Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
XLPP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLPP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLPP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
XLPP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLPP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
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.

XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C (XDWS.L) and Invesco US Consumer Staples Sector UCITS ETF (XLPP.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.


XDWS.LXLPP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.02

1.04

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.08

0.23

-0.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.18

0.48

-0.30

XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDWS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.06, which is lower than the XLPP.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDWS.L and XLPP.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


XDWS.LXLPP.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.06

0.15

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.33

0.50

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

0.55

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.47

0.60

-0.12

Drawdowns

XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDWS.L drawdown since its inception was -23.72%, roughly equal to the maximum XLPP.L drawdown of -23.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDWS.L and XLPP.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XDWS.LXLPP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.72%

-23.46%

-0.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.74%

-9.52%

-0.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.52%

-12.38%

+0.86%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.53%

-17.12%

-0.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-23.72%

-23.46%

-0.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.95%

-8.26%

-0.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.20%

-4.03%

-0.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.38%

4.46%

-0.08%

Volatility

XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C (XDWS.L) is 4.62%, while Invesco US Consumer Staples Sector UCITS ETF (XLPP.L) has a volatility of 5.78%. This indicates that XDWS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLPP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XDWS.LXLPP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.62%

5.78%

-1.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.21%

11.43%

-1.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.38%

13.93%

-1.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.11%

13.49%

-1.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.48%

13.81%

-1.33%

XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XDWS.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XLPP.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

XDWS.L vs. XLPP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XDWS.L nor XLPP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XDWS.L and XLPP.L have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

XLPP.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDWS.L.

Both ETFs track Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XDWS.L and 0.14% for XLPP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XDWS.L and XLPP.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