PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XGES.L vs. XLVS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XGES.L vs. XLVS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Genomic Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XGES.L) and Invesco Health Care S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLVS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XGES.L is traded in GBP, while XLVS.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XLVS.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XGES.L achieves a -0.81% return, which is significantly higher than XLVS.L's -1.70% return.


XGES.L

1D
4.22%
1M
6.75%
YTD
-0.81%
6M
-4.42%
1Y
26.00%
3Y*
1.51%
5Y*
10Y*

XLVS.L

1D
3.00%
1M
5.76%
YTD
-1.70%
6M
-1.27%
1Y
16.24%
3Y*
3.86%
5Y*
6.90%
10Y*
9.98%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XGES.L vs. XLVS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
XGES.L
Xtrackers MSCI Genomic Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF 1C
-0.81%11.22%-1.38%-7.92%-8.46%
XLVS.L
Invesco Health Care S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc
-1.70%6.60%3.94%-3.52%5.15%

Correlation

The correlation between XGES.L and XLVS.L is 0.65, 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

0.65

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

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 21, 2022

0.61

The correlation between XGES.L and XLVS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

XGES.L vs. XLVS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XGES.L
XGES.L Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
XGES.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XGES.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
XGES.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
XGES.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
XGES.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank

XLVS.L
XLVS.L Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
XLVS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLVS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLVS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
XLVS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLVS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
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.

XGES.L vs. XLVS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Genomic Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XGES.L) and Invesco Health Care S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLVS.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.


XGES.LXLVS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.41

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.18

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.69

1.39

+0.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.09

3.46

+0.63

XGES.L vs. XLVS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XGES.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.45, which is higher than the XLVS.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XGES.L and XLVS.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


XGES.LXLVS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.45

1.04

+0.41

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.12

0.70

-0.82

Drawdowns

XGES.L vs. XLVS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XGES.L drawdown since its inception was -35.79%, which is greater than XLVS.L's maximum drawdown of -24.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XGES.L and XLVS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XGES.LXLVS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.79%

-24.30%

-11.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.29%

-11.67%

-3.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.52%

-19.70%

-5.82%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.70%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-19.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.59%

-5.07%

-7.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.98%

-4.78%

-13.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.34%

4.68%

+1.66%

Volatility

XGES.L vs. XLVS.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Genomic Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XGES.L) has a higher volatility of 6.45% compared to Invesco Health Care S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLVS.L) at 5.57%. This indicates that XGES.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLVS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XGES.LXLVS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.45%

5.57%

+0.88%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.62%

11.37%

+2.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.84%

15.57%

+2.27%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.27%

15.06%

+3.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.27%

16.42%

+1.85%

XGES.L vs. XLVS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XGES.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than XLVS.L's 0.14% expense ratio.


Dividends

XGES.L vs. XLVS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XGES.L nor XLVS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XGES.L and XLVS.L have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

XLVS.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for XGES.L.

XGES.L tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD, while XLVS.L tracks S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Health Care Index. They also come from different issuers: DWS and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XGES.L and 0.14% for XLVS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XGES.L and XLVS.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