PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L) and Xtrackers MSCI USA Financials UCITS ETF 1D (XSFN.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
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

98.0%
97.7%

Technology

1.7%
1.9%

Industrials

0.2%
0.2%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

0.2%

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

XLFQ.L
98.0%
XSFN.L
97.7%

Technology

XLFQ.L
1.7%
XSFN.L
1.9%

Industrials

XLFQ.L
0.2%
XSFN.L
0.2%

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
0.2%

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

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

XLFQ.L
XLFQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
XLFQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

XSFN.L
XSFN.L Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
XSFN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XSFN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
XSFN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
XSFN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
XSFN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
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.

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.LXSFN.LDifference
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

XLFQ.L vs. XSFN.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLFQ.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.33, which is comparable to the XSFN.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLFQ.L and XSFN.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


XLFQ.LXSFN.LDifference

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.LXSFN.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.62%

-7.19%

+0.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.65%

-6.19%

+0.54%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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.LXSFN.LDifference

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%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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