XLEP.L vs. FWRA.L
XLEP.L (Invesco US Energy Sector UCITS ETF) and FWRA.L (Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation) are both exchange-traded funds - XLEP.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while FWRA.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the FTSE All-World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XLEP.L returned 47.38% vs 30.18% for FWRA.L. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XLEP.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FWRA.L.
Performance
XLEP.L vs. FWRA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
XLEP.L is traded in GBp, while FWRA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the FWRA.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XLEP.L achieves a 31.41% return, which is significantly higher than FWRA.L's 12.15% return.
XLEP.L
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- -0.08%
- YTD
- 31.41%
- 6M
- 28.36%
- 1Y
- 47.38%
- 3Y*
- 14.05%
- 5Y*
- 21.30%
- 10Y*
- 10.15%
FWRA.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 5.33%
- YTD
- 12.15%
- 6M
- 12.33%
- 1Y
- 30.18%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XLEP.L vs. FWRA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
XLEP.L Invesco US Energy Sector UCITS ETF | 31.41% | 1.41% | 4.85% | 6.47% |
FWRA.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation | 12.04% | 13.65% | 20.13% | 8.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between XLEP.L and FWRA.L is -0.16, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023 | 0.17 |
The correlation between XLEP.L and FWRA.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to 0.17 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XLEP.L vs. FWRA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XLEP.L
FWRA.L
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Energy
XLEP.L
FWRA.L
Basic Materials
XLEP.L
-
FWRA.L
Communication Services
XLEP.L
-
FWRA.L
Consumer Cyclical
XLEP.L
-
FWRA.L
Consumer Defensive
XLEP.L
-
FWRA.L
Financial Services
XLEP.L
-
FWRA.L
Healthcare
XLEP.L
-
FWRA.L
Industrials
XLEP.L
-
FWRA.L
Real Estate
XLEP.L
-
FWRA.L
Technology
XLEP.L
-
FWRA.L
Utilities
XLEP.L
-
FWRA.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
XLEP.L vs. FWRA.L — Risk / Return Rank
XLEP.L
FWRA.L
XLEP.L vs. FWRA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco US Energy Sector UCITS ETF (XLEP.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.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.
| XLEP.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.49 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.92 | 4.33 | -1.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.27 | 16.50 | -7.23 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XLEP.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.02 | 2.54 | -0.52 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.81 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.36 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.25 | 1.44 | -1.20 |
Drawdowns
XLEP.L vs. FWRA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XLEP.L drawdown since its inception was -63.35%, which is greater than FWRA.L's maximum drawdown of -17.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLEP.L and FWRA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XLEP.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.35% | -17.86% | -45.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.17% | -6.91% | -9.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.06% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.16% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -63.35% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.08% | -0.38% | -7.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.96% | -2.09% | -14.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.10% | 1.82% | +3.28% |
Volatility
XLEP.L vs. FWRA.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco US Energy Sector UCITS ETF (XLEP.L) has a higher volatility of 8.92% compared to Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.L) at 3.67%. This indicates that XLEP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FWRA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XLEP.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.92% | 3.67% | +5.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.87% | 9.28% | +10.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.44% | 11.79% | +11.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.28% | 12.93% | +13.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.14% | 12.93% | +15.21% |
XLEP.L vs. FWRA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XLEP.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than FWRA.L's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
XLEP.L vs. FWRA.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XLEP.L nor FWRA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XLEP.L and FWRA.L have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XLEP.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLEP.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for FWRA.L.
XLEP.L is categorized as Energy Equities, while FWRA.L is Global Equities. XLEP.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while FWRA.L tracks FTSE All-World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for XLEP.L and 0.15% for FWRA.L.
Find the right allocation for XLEP.L and FWRA.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