XGLS.L vs. XNAQ.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XGLS.L (Xtrackers Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC) and XNAQ.L (Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - XGLS.L is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Gold (GBP Hedged), while XNAQ.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XGLS.L returned 16.90%/yr vs 18.96%/yr for XNAQ.L. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. XGLS.L charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XNAQ.L.

Performance

XGLS.L vs. XNAQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC (XGLS.L) and Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

XGLS.L is traded in GBp, while XNAQ.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the XNAQ.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XGLS.L achieves a 2.29% return, which is significantly lower than XNAQ.L's 19.89% return.

XGLS.L

• 1D: -1.39%
• 1M: -4.31%
• YTD: 2.29%
• 6M: 4.33%
• 1Y: 30.74%
• 3Y*: 29.56%
• 5Y*: 16.90%
• 10Y*: 11.69%

XNAQ.L

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 9.63%
• YTD: 19.89%
• 6M: 18.46%
• 1Y: 41.84%
• 3Y*: 24.81%
• 5Y*: 18.96%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
XGLS.L Xtrackers Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC	2.29%	63.07%	24.85%	11.63%	-1.63%	-2.81%
XNAQ.L Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C	19.89%	11.71%	28.62%	47.83%	-25.44%	26.22%

Correlation

The correlation between XGLS.L and XNAQ.L is 0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.06
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.03
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2021	-0.02

Return for Risk

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

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

XGLS.L

XGLS.L Risk / Return Rank: 34
XGLS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
XGLS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
XGLS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 37
XGLS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
XGLS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 31

XNAQ.L

XNAQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
XNAQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
XNAQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 83
XNAQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC (XGLS.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.

	XGLS.L	XNAQ.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.24	2.83	-1.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.65	3.70	-2.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.50	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.68	3.79	-2.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.44	11.13	-6.69
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current XGLS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is lower than the XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XGLS.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XGLS.L	XNAQ.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.24	2.83	-1.59
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98	1.00	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.75	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.35	0.93	-0.57

Drawdowns

XGLS.L vs. XNAQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XGLS.L drawdown since its inception was -46.55%, which is greater than XNAQ.L's maximum drawdown of -27.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XGLS.L and XNAQ.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XGLS.L	XNAQ.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.55%	-27.52%	-19.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.19%	-10.99%	-7.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.19%	-24.56%	+6.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.88%	-27.52%	+5.64%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-22.99%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.80%	-0.63%	-16.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.38%	-7.01%	-16.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.91%	3.75%	+3.16%

Volatility

XGLS.L vs. XNAQ.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Physical Gold GBP Hedged ETC (XGLS.L) has a higher volatility of 6.43% compared to Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L) at 4.18%. This indicates that XGLS.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

	XGLS.L	XNAQ.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.43%	4.18%	+2.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.82%	10.38%	+11.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.79%	14.73%	+10.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.26%	19.04%	-1.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.52%	19.13%	-3.61%

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

XGLS.L has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than XNAQ.L's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

XGLS.L vs. XNAQ.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

XGLS.L and XNAQ.L have a correlation of 0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

XNAQ.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for XGLS.L.

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

XGLS.L is categorized as Precious Metals, while XNAQ.L is Nasdaq-100. XGLS.L tracks Gold (GBP Hedged), while XNAQ.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for XGLS.L and 0.20% for XNAQ.L.