PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Korea UCITS ETF 1C (XKS2.L) and Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XKS2.L is traded in GBp, while XNAS.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XNAS.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XKS2.L achieves a 107.22% return, which is significantly higher than XNAS.L's 20.93% return.


XKS2.L

1D
-4.89%
1M
17.08%
YTD
107.22%
6M
125.61%
1Y
237.24%
3Y*
45.20%
5Y*
19.87%
10Y*
17.87%

XNAS.L

1D
0.00%
1M
10.24%
YTD
20.93%
6M
19.10%
1Y
42.68%
3Y*
25.15%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
XKS2.L
Xtrackers MSCI Korea UCITS ETF 1C
107.22%85.79%-21.66%13.44%6.94%
XNAS.L
Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF
20.16%11.29%28.81%48.59%-8.32%

Correlation

The correlation between XKS2.L and XNAS.L is 0.55, 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

0.55

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

0.51

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2022

0.47

The correlation between XKS2.L and XNAS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XKS2.L
XNAS.L

Technology

56.0%
53.7%

Industrials

18.7%
3.1%

Financial Services

9.2%
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

5.7%
12.2%

Healthcare

3.0%
4.2%

Communication Services

2.6%
15.8%

Basic Materials

2.0%
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

1.4%
7.7%

Energy

1.1%
0.6%

Utilities

0.4%
1.4%

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Technology

XKS2.L
56.0%
XNAS.L
53.7%

Industrials

XKS2.L
18.7%
XNAS.L
3.1%

Financial Services

XKS2.L
9.2%
XNAS.L
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

XKS2.L
5.7%
XNAS.L
12.2%

Healthcare

XKS2.L
3.0%
XNAS.L
4.2%

Communication Services

XKS2.L
2.6%
XNAS.L
15.8%

Basic Materials

XKS2.L
2.0%
XNAS.L
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

XKS2.L
1.4%
XNAS.L
7.7%

Energy

XKS2.L
1.1%
XNAS.L
0.6%

Utilities

XKS2.L
0.4%
XNAS.L
1.4%

Real Estate

XKS2.L

-

XNAS.L
0.1%

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

XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XKS2.L
XKS2.L Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
XKS2.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XKS2.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
XKS2.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
XKS2.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
XKS2.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank

XNAS.L
XNAS.L Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
XNAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XNAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
XNAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
XNAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
XNAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Korea UCITS ETF 1C (XKS2.L) and Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.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.


XKS2.LXNAS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+3.73

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.29

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.85

1.48

+0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

11.05

3.82

+7.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

39.18

10.85

+28.33

XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XKS2.L Sharpe Ratio is 6.41, which is higher than the XNAS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XKS2.L and XNAS.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


XKS2.LXNAS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.41

2.68

+3.73

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.79

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.73

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

1.41

-1.03

Drawdowns

XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XKS2.L drawdown since its inception was -62.63%, which is greater than XNAS.L's maximum drawdown of -24.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XKS2.L and XNAS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XKS2.LXNAS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-62.63%

-24.49%

-38.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.33%

-11.08%

-10.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.70%

-24.49%

-4.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.70%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.01%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.27%

0.00%

-5.27%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.75%

-3.85%

-11.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.03%

3.91%

+2.12%

Volatility

XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Korea UCITS ETF 1C (XKS2.L) has a higher volatility of 17.29% compared to Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L) at 4.93%. This indicates that XKS2.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XNAS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XKS2.LXNAS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

17.29%

4.93%

+12.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

32.10%

11.49%

+20.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

36.79%

15.78%

+21.01%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

25.17%

18.98%

+6.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.35%

18.98%

+5.37%

XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XKS2.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XNAS.L's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

XKS2.L vs. XNAS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XKS2.L nor XNAS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XKS2.L and XNAS.L have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XNAS.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XNAS.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for XKS2.L.

XKS2.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while XNAS.L is Nasdaq-100. XKS2.L tracks MSCI Korea NR USD, while XNAS.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XKS2.L and 0.20% for XNAS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XKS2.L and XNAS.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