PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XLFS.L vs. FING.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XLFS.L vs. FING.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.L) and Global X FinTech UCITS ETF USD Distributing (FING.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XLFS.L is traded in USD, while FING.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FING.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLFS.L achieves a -4.92% return, which is significantly higher than FING.L's -15.39% return.


XLFS.L

1D
3.23%
1M
1.32%
YTD
-4.92%
6M
-2.00%
1Y
3.65%
3Y*
18.50%
5Y*
7.94%
10Y*
12.18%

FING.L

1D
2.14%
1M
-2.59%
YTD
-15.39%
6M
-17.15%
1Y
-19.86%
3Y*
6.46%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XLFS.L vs. FING.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
XLFS.L
Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc
-4.92%14.99%30.15%12.12%-11.03%-0.82%
FING.L
Global X FinTech UCITS ETF USD Distributing
-15.39%-5.54%21.97%35.90%-52.90%-12.62%

Correlation

The correlation between XLFS.L and FING.L is 0.59, 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

0.59

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

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2021

0.63

The correlation between XLFS.L and FING.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

XLFS.L vs. FING.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XLFS.L
FING.L

Financial Services

98.4%
40.6%

Technology

1.6%
54.2%

Industrials

0.2%
3.9%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

0.0%

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

1.4%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

XLFS.L
98.4%
FING.L
40.6%

Technology

XLFS.L
1.6%
FING.L
54.2%

Industrials

XLFS.L
0.2%
FING.L
3.9%

Basic Materials

XLFS.L

-

FING.L

-

Communication Services

XLFS.L

-

FING.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

XLFS.L

-

FING.L

-

Consumer Defensive

XLFS.L

-

FING.L
0.0%

Energy

XLFS.L

-

FING.L

-

Healthcare

XLFS.L

-

FING.L
1.4%

Real Estate

XLFS.L

-

FING.L

-

Utilities

XLFS.L

-

FING.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

XLFS.L vs. FING.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLFS.L
XLFS.L Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
XLFS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

FING.L
FING.L Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
FING.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FING.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
FING.L Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
FING.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
Calmar Ratio Rank
FING.L Martin Ratio Rank: 44
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.

XLFS.L vs. FING.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.L) and Global X FinTech UCITS ETF USD Distributing (FING.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.


XLFS.LFING.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.99

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.05

0.89

+0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.26

-0.54

+0.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.65

-1.02

+1.68

XLFS.L vs. FING.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLFS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.25, which is higher than the FING.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLFS.L and FING.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


XLFS.LFING.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.25

-0.74

+0.99

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.42

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.55

-0.41

+0.96

Drawdowns

XLFS.L vs. FING.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLFS.L drawdown since its inception was -42.76%, smaller than the maximum FING.L drawdown of -60.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLFS.L and FING.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XLFS.LFING.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.76%

-60.60%

+17.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.93%

-36.53%

+22.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.10%

-36.53%

+19.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.86%

-45.57%

+38.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.53%

-42.47%

+34.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.57%

19.39%

-13.82%

Volatility

XLFS.L vs. FING.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.L) is 4.54%, while Global X FinTech UCITS ETF USD Distributing (FING.L) has a volatility of 7.87%. This indicates that XLFS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FING.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XLFS.LFING.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.54%

7.87%

-3.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.06%

20.77%

-9.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.53%

26.96%

-12.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.00%

30.65%

-11.65%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.94%

30.65%

-9.71%

XLFS.L vs. FING.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLFS.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than FING.L's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

XLFS.L vs. FING.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XLFS.L nor FING.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023
FING.L
Global X FinTech UCITS ETF USD Distributing
0.00%0.00%0.21%0.08%
XLFS.L
Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


XLFS.L and FING.L have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XLFS.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XLFS.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FING.L.

XLFS.L tracks S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Financials Index, while FING.L tracks Indxx Global Fintech Thematic. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for XLFS.L and 0.60% for FING.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XLFS.L and FING.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