XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L
XLFQ.L (Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF) and XSFN.L (Xtrackers MSCI USA Financials UCITS ETF 1D) are both Financials Equities funds tracking the MSCI World/Financials NR USD, from Invesco and Xtrackers respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XLFQ.L returned 9.10%/yr vs 9.61%/yr for XSFN.L. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XLFQ.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for XSFN.L.
Performance
XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XLFQ.L achieves a -4.71% return, which is significantly higher than XSFN.L's -5.19% 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%
XSFN.L
- 1D
- 3.29%
- 1M
- 1.94%
- YTD
- -5.19%
- 6M
- -2.92%
- 1Y
- 4.85%
- 3Y*
- 16.41%
- 5Y*
- 9.61%
- 10Y*
- —
XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XLFQ.L Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF | -4.71% | 7.07% | 32.15% | 6.12% | -0.39% | 37.90% | -6.56% | 27.16% | -5.93% |
XSFN.L Xtrackers MSCI USA Financials UCITS ETF 1D | -5.19% | 7.83% | 34.69% | 8.03% | -2.82% | 38.02% | -7.44% | 29.37% | -6.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between XLFQ.L and XSFN.L is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.99 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 30, 2018 | 0.72 |
Over the past year, XLFQ.L and XSFN.L have become more correlated (0.99) than their long-term average of 0.72, meaning their price movements have been converging.
XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XLFQ.L
XSFN.L
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
XLFQ.L
XSFN.L
Technology
XLFQ.L
XSFN.L
Industrials
XLFQ.L
XSFN.L
Basic Materials
XLFQ.L
-
XSFN.L
-
Communication Services
XLFQ.L
-
XSFN.L
-
Consumer Cyclical
XLFQ.L
-
XSFN.L
-
Consumer Defensive
XLFQ.L
-
XSFN.L
-
Energy
XLFQ.L
-
XSFN.L
-
Healthcare
XLFQ.L
-
XSFN.L
-
Real Estate
XLFQ.L
-
XSFN.L
Utilities
XLFQ.L
-
XSFN.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. XSFN.L — Risk / Return Rank
XLFQ.L
XSFN.L
XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.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 Xtrackers MSCI USA Financials UCITS ETF 1D (XSFN.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 | XSFN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.00 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.07 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.36 | 0.36 | 0.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.84 | 0.85 | 0.00 |
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 | XSFN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 | 0.59 | -0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.65 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.64 | 0.67 | -0.03 |
Drawdowns
XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XLFQ.L drawdown since its inception was -35.39%, roughly equal to the maximum XSFN.L drawdown of -33.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLFQ.L and XSFN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XLFQ.L | XSFN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.39% | -33.95% | -1.44% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.81% | -13.39% | +0.58% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.01% | -19.67% | +0.66% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.01% | -19.67% | +0.66% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.39% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.62% | -7.19% | +0.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.65% | -6.19% | +0.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.48% | 5.72% | -0.24% |
Volatility
XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L) and Xtrackers MSCI USA Financials UCITS ETF 1D (XSFN.L) have volatilities of 4.46% and 4.56%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XLFQ.L | XSFN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.46% | 4.56% | -0.10% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.48% | 10.77% | -0.29% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.91% | 14.43% | -0.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.52% | 19.13% | -1.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.14% | 23.77% | -3.63% |
XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XLFQ.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is higher than XSFN.L's 0.12% expense ratio. However, 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. XSFN.L - Dividend Comparison
XLFQ.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XSFN.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XLFQ.L Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XSFN.L Xtrackers MSCI USA Financials UCITS ETF 1D | 1.16% | 1.14% | 1.10% | 1.69% | 2.57% | 1.31% | 1.31% | 3.49% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.99, XLFQ.L and XSFN.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, XSFN.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XSFN.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.14% for XLFQ.L.
Both ETFs track MSCI World/Financials NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for XLFQ.L and 0.12% for XSFN.L.
Find the right allocation for XLFQ.L and XSFN.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