XLFQ.L vs. IWFM.L
XLFQ.L (Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF) and IWFM.L (iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - XLFQ.L is a Financials Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while IWFM.L is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI World Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XLFQ.L returned 13.02%/yr vs 16.44%/yr for IWFM.L. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XLFQ.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for IWFM.L.
Performance
XLFQ.L vs. IWFM.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XLFQ.L achieves a -4.71% return, which is significantly lower than IWFM.L's 22.13% return. Over the past 10 years, XLFQ.L has underperformed IWFM.L with an annualized return of 13.02%, while IWFM.L has yielded a comparatively higher 16.44% annualized return.
XLFQ.L
- 1D
- 3.26%
- 1M
- 2.31%
- YTD
- -4.71%
- 6M
- -2.62%
- 1Y
- 4.63%
- 3Y*
- 15.45%
- 5Y*
- 9.10%
- 10Y*
- 13.02%
IWFM.L
- 1D
- -0.86%
- 1M
- 8.93%
- YTD
- 22.13%
- 6M
- 22.59%
- 1Y
- 35.15%
- 3Y*
- 26.24%
- 5Y*
- 14.83%
- 10Y*
- 16.44%
XLFQ.L vs. IWFM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XLFQ.L Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF | -4.71% | 7.07% | 32.15% | 6.12% | -0.39% | 37.90% | -6.56% | 27.16% | -9.51% | 11.87% |
IWFM.L iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc) | 22.13% | 12.72% | 32.62% | 5.85% | -8.21% | 15.58% | 24.16% | 23.25% | 1.62% | 20.40% |
Correlation
The correlation between XLFQ.L and IWFM.L is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 8, 2014 | 0.58 |
Over the past year, the correlation between XLFQ.L and IWFM.L has dropped to 0.35 - well below their long-term average of 0.58, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
XLFQ.L vs. IWFM.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XLFQ.L
IWFM.L
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
XLFQ.L
IWFM.L
Technology
XLFQ.L
IWFM.L
Industrials
XLFQ.L
IWFM.L
Basic Materials
XLFQ.L
-
IWFM.L
Communication Services
XLFQ.L
-
IWFM.L
Consumer Cyclical
XLFQ.L
-
IWFM.L
Consumer Defensive
XLFQ.L
-
IWFM.L
Energy
XLFQ.L
-
IWFM.L
Healthcare
XLFQ.L
-
IWFM.L
Real Estate
XLFQ.L
-
IWFM.L
Utilities
XLFQ.L
-
IWFM.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
XLFQ.L vs. IWFM.L — Risk / Return Rank
XLFQ.L
IWFM.L
XLFQ.L vs. IWFM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L) and iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc) (IWFM.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.
| XLFQ.L | IWFM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.83 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.61 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.39 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.36 | 3.91 | -3.55 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.84 | 15.27 | -14.42 |
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
| XLFQ.L | IWFM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 | 2.16 | -1.83 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 | 0.90 | -0.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.65 | 0.98 | -0.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.64 | 0.98 | -0.34 |
Drawdowns
XLFQ.L vs. IWFM.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XLFQ.L drawdown since its inception was -35.39%, which is greater than IWFM.L's maximum drawdown of -22.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLFQ.L and IWFM.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XLFQ.L | IWFM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.39% | -22.58% | -12.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.81% | -8.95% | -3.86% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.01% | -20.40% | +1.39% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.01% | -20.40% | +1.39% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.39% | -22.58% | -12.81% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.62% | -0.86% | -5.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.65% | -4.94% | -0.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.48% | 2.30% | +3.18% |
Volatility
XLFQ.L vs. IWFM.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L) is 4.46%, while iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS ETF (Acc) (IWFM.L) has a volatility of 5.85%. This indicates that XLFQ.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWFM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XLFQ.L | IWFM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.46% | 5.85% | -1.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.48% | 13.75% | -3.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.91% | 16.21% | -2.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.52% | 16.47% | +1.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.14% | 17.18% | +2.96% |
XLFQ.L vs. IWFM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XLFQ.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than IWFM.L's 0.25% 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
XLFQ.L vs. IWFM.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XLFQ.L nor IWFM.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XLFQ.L and IWFM.L have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XLFQ.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLFQ.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for IWFM.L.
XLFQ.L is categorized as Financials Equities, while IWFM.L is Momentum. XLFQ.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while IWFM.L tracks MSCI World Momentum Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for XLFQ.L and 0.25% for IWFM.L.
Find the right allocation for XLFQ.L and IWFM.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