XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

XESE.L (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets ESG UCITS ETF 1C) and XNAQ.L (Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - XESE.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM 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, XESE.L returned 3.16%/yr vs 17.27%/yr for XNAQ.L. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XESE.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XNAQ.L.

Performance

XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets ESG UCITS ETF 1C (XESE.L) and Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XESE.L achieves a 12.35% return, which is significantly lower than XNAQ.L's 18.62% return.

XESE.L

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 3.62%
• YTD: 12.35%
• 6M: 13.13%
• 1Y: 28.43%
• 3Y*: 15.76%
• 5Y*: 3.16%
• 10Y*: —

XNAQ.L

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 1.59%
• YTD: 18.62%
• 6M: 18.38%
• 1Y: 38.17%
• 3Y*: 24.73%
• 5Y*: 17.27%
• 10Y*: —

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

XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
XESE.L Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets ESG UCITS ETF 1C	12.35%	22.03%	12.08%	-1.92%	-11.39%	-17.01%
XNAQ.L Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C	18.62%	11.72%	28.64%	47.82%	-25.44%	-8.88%

Correlation

The correlation between XESE.L and XNAQ.L is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2021	0.53

The correlation between XESE.L and XNAQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XESE.L	XNAQ.L
Technology	31.3%	58.5%
Financial Services	24.6%	0.2%
Communication Services	13.7%	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	13.2%	11.4%
Industrials	4.8%	2.8%
Healthcare	3.6%	3.7%
Basic Materials	3.4%	1.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	6.4%
Real Estate	1.5%	0.1%
Utilities	0.9%	1.2%
Energy	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XESE.L

XESE.L Risk / Return Rank: 55
XESE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
XESE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
XESE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 54
XESE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
XESE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 53

XNAQ.L

XNAQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 77
XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
XNAQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
XNAQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 81
XNAQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
XNAQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets ESG UCITS ETF 1C (XESE.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	XESE.L	XNAQ.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.61	2.42	-0.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.18	3.20	-1.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.43	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.64	3.46	-0.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.09	9.99	-1.90

XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XESE.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is lower than the XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XESE.L and XNAQ.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.

Drawdowns

XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XESE.L drawdown since its inception was -37.68%, which is greater than XNAQ.L's maximum drawdown of -34.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XESE.L and XNAQ.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XESE.L	XNAQ.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.68%	-34.26%	-3.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.71%	-10.99%	+0.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.88%	-24.55%	+7.67%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.20%	-27.52%	-4.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.07%	-2.52%	-2.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.30%	-13.59%	-4.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.51%	3.81%	-0.30%

Volatility

XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets ESG UCITS ETF 1C (XESE.L) has a higher volatility of 8.96% compared to Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L) at 6.22%. This indicates that XESE.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.

Volatility by Period

	XESE.L	XNAQ.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.96%	6.22%	+2.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.06%	11.62%	+3.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.71%	15.74%	+1.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.37%	23.69%	-5.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.45%	25.96%	-7.51%

XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XESE.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

XESE.L vs. XNAQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XESE.L nor XNAQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XESE.L and XNAQ.L in my portfolio?

XESE.L and XNAQ.L have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XESE.L or XNAQ.L?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, XESE.L or XNAQ.L?

XNAQ.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XESE.L.

What is the main difference between XESE.L and XNAQ.L?

XESE.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while XNAQ.L is Nasdaq-100. XESE.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while XNAQ.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XESE.L and 0.20% for XNAQ.L.