PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF (XLVP.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLVP.L achieves a -1.84% return, which is significantly higher than XDWH.L's -2.35% return. Over the past 10 years, XLVP.L has outperformed XDWH.L with an annualized return of 9.99%, while XDWH.L has yielded a comparatively lower 8.66% annualized return.


XLVP.L

1D
3.10%
1M
5.91%
YTD
-1.84%
6M
-1.13%
1Y
16.32%
3Y*
3.80%
5Y*
6.90%
10Y*
9.99%

XDWH.L

1D
2.99%
1M
4.20%
YTD
-2.35%
6M
-2.32%
1Y
12.65%
3Y*
2.85%
5Y*
5.67%
10Y*
8.66%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XLVP.L
Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF
-1.84%6.91%3.77%-3.87%8.97%29.14%8.22%16.79%10.30%11.00%
XDWH.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C
-2.35%7.04%2.51%-1.38%5.83%21.71%9.57%18.28%7.59%9.77%

Correlation

The correlation between XLVP.L and XDWH.L is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.91

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

0.89

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.88

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 29, 2016

0.89

The correlation between XLVP.L and XDWH.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XLVP.L
XDWH.L

Healthcare

100.0%
98.9%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

0.5%

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Healthcare

XLVP.L
100.0%
XDWH.L
98.9%

Basic Materials

XLVP.L

-

XDWH.L

-

Communication Services

XLVP.L

-

XDWH.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

XLVP.L

-

XDWH.L

-

Consumer Defensive

XLVP.L

-

XDWH.L
0.5%

Energy

XLVP.L

-

XDWH.L

-

Financial Services

XLVP.L

-

XDWH.L

-

Industrials

XLVP.L

-

XDWH.L

-

Real Estate

XLVP.L

-

XDWH.L

-

Technology

XLVP.L

-

XDWH.L

-

Utilities

XLVP.L

-

XDWH.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

XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLVP.L
XLVP.L Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
XLVP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLVP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLVP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
XLVP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLVP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

XDWH.L
XDWH.L Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
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.

XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF (XLVP.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.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.


XLVP.LXDWH.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.16

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.41

1.21

+0.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.56

3.15

+0.42

XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLVP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is comparable to the XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLVP.L and XDWH.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


XLVP.LXDWH.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.10

0.86

+0.24

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

0.40

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

0.56

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.71

0.59

+0.12

Drawdowns

XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLVP.L drawdown since its inception was -19.67%, roughly equal to the maximum XDWH.L drawdown of -18.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLVP.L and XDWH.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XLVP.LXDWH.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.67%

-18.80%

-0.87%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.56%

-10.43%

-1.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.67%

-18.80%

-0.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.67%

-18.80%

-0.87%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-19.67%

-18.80%

-0.87%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.97%

-5.80%

+0.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.62%

-4.41%

-0.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.57%

4.01%

+0.56%

Volatility

XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco US Health Care Sector UCITS ETF (XLVP.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L) have volatilities of 5.43% and 5.30%, 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


XLVP.LXDWH.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.43%

5.30%

+0.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.54%

10.98%

-0.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.76%

14.58%

+0.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.25%

14.02%

+0.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.85%

15.50%

+0.35%

XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLVP.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than XDWH.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

XLVP.L vs. XDWH.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XLVP.L nor XDWH.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, XLVP.L and XDWH.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, XLVP.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XLVP.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDWH.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI World/Health Care NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for XLVP.L and 0.25% for XDWH.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XLVP.L and XDWH.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