XLPP.L vs. LUXG.L
XLPP.L (Invesco US Consumer Staples Sector UCITS ETF) and LUXG.L (Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD) are both Consumer Staples Equities funds tracking the Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR, from Invesco and Amundi respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XLPP.L returned 8.36%/yr vs 10.54%/yr for LUXG.L. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XLPP.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for LUXG.L.
Performance
XLPP.L vs. LUXG.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XLPP.L achieves a 6.46% return, which is significantly higher than LUXG.L's -7.30% return. Over the past 10 years, XLPP.L has underperformed LUXG.L with an annualized return of 8.36%, while LUXG.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.54% annualized return.
XLPP.L
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- -1.92%
- YTD
- 6.46%
- 6M
- 6.19%
- 1Y
- 3.14%
- 3Y*
- 5.55%
- 5Y*
- 7.90%
- 10Y*
- 8.36%
LUXG.L
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- 5.50%
- YTD
- -7.30%
- 6M
- -6.56%
- 1Y
- 5.65%
- 3Y*
- -0.76%
- 5Y*
- 0.46%
- 10Y*
- 10.54%
XLPP.L vs. LUXG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XLPP.L Invesco US Consumer Staples Sector UCITS ETF | 6.46% | -2.88% | 15.99% | -5.68% | 11.45% | 19.81% | 5.47% | 22.94% | -4.14% | 2.23% |
LUXG.L Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD | -7.30% | 6.94% | -0.12% | 9.77% | -14.46% | 23.84% | 31.63% | 24.83% | -7.67% | 26.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between XLPP.L and LUXG.L is 0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2016 | 0.33 |
Over the past year, the correlation between XLPP.L and LUXG.L has dropped to 0.08 - well below their long-term average of 0.33, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
XLPP.L vs. LUXG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XLPP.L
LUXG.L
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
XLPP.L
LUXG.L
Technology
XLPP.L
LUXG.L
Industrials
XLPP.L
LUXG.L
Basic Materials
XLPP.L
-
LUXG.L
-
Communication Services
XLPP.L
-
LUXG.L
Consumer Defensive
XLPP.L
-
LUXG.L
Energy
XLPP.L
-
LUXG.L
Financial Services
XLPP.L
-
LUXG.L
Healthcare
XLPP.L
-
LUXG.L
Real Estate
XLPP.L
-
LUXG.L
-
Utilities
XLPP.L
-
LUXG.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
XLPP.L vs. LUXG.L — Risk / Return Rank
XLPP.L
LUXG.L
XLPP.L vs. LUXG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco US Consumer Staples Sector UCITS ETF (XLPP.L) and Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD (LUXG.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.
| XLPP.L | LUXG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | 1.07 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.33 | 0.35 | -0.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.81 | 0.87 | -0.06 |
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
| XLPP.L | LUXG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.22 | 0.30 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 | 0.02 | +0.57 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.58 | 0.52 | +0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.72 | 0.50 | +0.22 |
Drawdowns
XLPP.L vs. LUXG.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XLPP.L drawdown since its inception was -18.86%, smaller than the maximum LUXG.L drawdown of -36.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLPP.L and LUXG.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XLPP.L | LUXG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.86% | -36.58% | +17.72% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.36% | -15.95% | +6.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.62% | -25.30% | +13.68% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -13.72% | -29.20% | +15.48% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -18.86% | -36.58% | +17.72% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.49% | -11.83% | +4.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.55% | -8.19% | +3.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.88% | 6.48% | -2.60% |
Volatility
XLPP.L vs. LUXG.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco US Consumer Staples Sector UCITS ETF (XLPP.L) and Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD (LUXG.L) have volatilities of 6.28% and 6.60%, 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
| XLPP.L | LUXG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.28% | 6.60% | -0.32% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.72% | 15.18% | -3.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.19% | 18.83% | -4.64% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.35% | 20.57% | -7.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.43% | 20.37% | -5.94% |
XLPP.L vs. LUXG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XLPP.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than LUXG.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
XLPP.L vs. LUXG.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XLPP.L nor LUXG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XLPP.L and LUXG.L have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XLPP.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLPP.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for LUXG.L.
Both ETFs track Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for XLPP.L and 0.25% for LUXG.L.
Find the right allocation for XLPP.L and LUXG.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