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

Performance

XLFS.L vs. XLFQ.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 Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XLFS.L
Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc
-9.48%14.99%30.15%12.12%-11.03%36.17%-3.47%31.51%-14.44%22.86%
XLFQ.L
Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF
-9.52%15.15%29.95%11.72%-11.04%36.65%-3.70%32.26%-14.64%22.52%
Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with XLFS.L having a -9.48% return and XLFQ.L slightly lower at -9.52%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with XLFS.L having a 12.17% annualized return and XLFQ.L not far behind at 12.13%.


XLFS.L

1D
1.79%
1M
-2.43%
YTD
-9.48%
6M
-6.73%
1Y
1.02%
3Y*
17.29%
5Y*
9.24%
10Y*
12.17%

XLFQ.L

1D
1.73%
1M
-2.77%
YTD
-9.52%
6M
-6.76%
1Y
1.03%
3Y*
17.39%
5Y*
9.22%
10Y*
12.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


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

Both XLFS.L and XLFQ.L have an expense ratio of 0.14%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Return for Risk

XLFS.L vs. XLFQ.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: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

XLFQ.L
XLFQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
XLFQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLFQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 88
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. XLFQ.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 Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.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.LXLFQ.LDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.05

0.06

0.00

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.21

0.21

0.00

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.03

1.03

0.00

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.03

0.01

+0.02

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

0.10

0.03

+0.06

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

The current XLFS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.05, which is comparable to the XLFQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLFS.L and XLFQ.L, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XLFS.LXLFQ.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.05

0.06

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

0.49

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

0.58

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.54

0.55

-0.02

Correlation

The correlation between XLFS.L and XLFQ.L is 0.94, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

XLFS.L vs. XLFQ.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

XLFS.L vs. XLFQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLFS.L drawdown since its inception was -42.76%, roughly equal to the maximum XLFQ.L drawdown of -42.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLFS.L and XLFQ.L.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


XLFS.LXLFQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.76%

-35.39%

-7.37%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.93%

-12.81%

-1.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.06%

-19.01%

-7.05%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.76%

-35.39%

-7.37%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.33%

-10.32%

-1.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.52%

-5.61%

-1.91%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.65%

4.58%

+0.07%

Volatility

XLFS.L vs. XLFQ.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.L) has a higher volatility of 5.13% compared to Invesco US Financials Sector UCITS ETF (XLFQ.L) at 4.85%. This indicates that XLFS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLFQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


XLFS.LXLFQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.13%

4.85%

+0.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.62%

10.57%

+0.05%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.61%

18.47%

+0.14%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.01%

18.68%

+0.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.92%

20.88%

+0.04%