PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMAS.L (Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and ITWN.L (iShares MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - XMAS.L tracks the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD while ITWN.L tracks the MSCI Taiwan NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMAS.L returned 12.25%/yr vs 23.12%/yr for ITWN.L. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMAS.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for ITWN.L.

Performance

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMAS.L) and iShares MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF (ITWN.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMAS.L achieves a 32.61% return, which is significantly lower than ITWN.L's 67.93% return. Over the past 10 years, XMAS.L has underperformed ITWN.L with an annualized return of 12.25%, while ITWN.L has yielded a comparatively higher 23.12% annualized return.

XMAS.L

1D
-1.96%
1M
9.32%
YTD
32.61%
6M
35.11%
1Y
63.40%
3Y*
24.06%
5Y*
9.51%
10Y*
12.25%

ITWN.L

1D
-1.63%
1M
14.84%
YTD
67.93%
6M
73.48%
1Y
117.37%
3Y*
40.47%
5Y*
22.94%
10Y*
23.12%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMAS.L
Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C		32.61%25.07%17.38%-2.13%-11.07%-5.15%22.90%14.01%-10.84%30.08%
ITWN.L
iShares MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF		67.93%22.61%25.77%21.84%-21.08%29.84%29.40%30.88%-3.90%16.56%

Correlation

The correlation between XMAS.L and ITWN.L is 0.82, 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

0.82

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

0.59

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

0.55

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

0.56

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 20, 2007

0.58

Over the past year, XMAS.L and ITWN.L have become more correlated (0.82) than their long-term average of 0.58, meaning their price movements have been converging.

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMAS.L
ITWN.L

Technology

38.0%
80.7%

Industrials

17.2%
2.4%

Healthcare

14.3%
0.6%

Communication Services

9.7%
1.4%

Financial Services

8.6%
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

6.4%
1.2%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
0.8%

Real Estate

0.9%

-

Utilities

0.4%

-

Basic Materials

0.2%
2.0%

Energy

0.0%

-

Technology

XMAS.L
38.0%
ITWN.L
80.7%

Industrials

XMAS.L
17.2%
ITWN.L
2.4%

Healthcare

XMAS.L
14.3%
ITWN.L
0.6%

Communication Services

XMAS.L
9.7%
ITWN.L
1.4%

Financial Services

XMAS.L
8.6%
ITWN.L
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

XMAS.L
6.4%
ITWN.L
1.2%

Consumer Defensive

XMAS.L
4.1%
ITWN.L
0.8%

Real Estate

XMAS.L
0.9%
ITWN.L

-

Utilities

XMAS.L
0.4%
ITWN.L

-

Basic Materials

XMAS.L
0.2%
ITWN.L
2.0%

Energy

XMAS.L
0.0%
ITWN.L

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C

iShares MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF

Often compared with XMAS.L:
XMAS.L vs. SPYXMAS.L vs. SUSAXMAS.L vs. IKOR.LXMAS.L vs. ASDV.LXMAS.L vs. LGAG.LXMAS.L vs. CPJ1.LXMAS.L vs. FLRK.L
Often compared with ITWN.L:
ITWN.L vs. QQQITWN.L vs. SPINXITWN.L vs. TSMITWN.L vs. VTIITWN.L vs. VWCE.DEITWN.L vs. FLXT.DEITWN.L vs. FLIN

Return for Risk

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMAS.L
XMAS.L Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
XMAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
XMAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
ITWN.L
ITWN.L Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
ITWN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ITWN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
ITWN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
ITWN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
ITWN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMAS.L) and iShares MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF (ITWN.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.

XMAS.LITWN.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.37
5.10

-1.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.27
5.92

-1.65

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.81

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.42

12.46

-7.05

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.46

34.79

-16.33

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMAS.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is lower than the ITWN.L Sharpe Ratio of 5.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAS.L and ITWN.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

XMAS.LITWN.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.37

5.10

-1.74

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

1.10

-0.43

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

1.17

-0.34

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.43

0.64

-0.22

Drawdowns

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAS.L drawdown since its inception was -55.27%, which is greater than ITWN.L's maximum drawdown of -48.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAS.L and ITWN.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMAS.LITWN.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-55.27%

-48.27%

-7.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.65%

-9.36%

-2.29%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.75%

-29.32%

+11.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.81%

-30.07%

+1.26%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.23%

-30.07%

-4.16%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.73%

-1.80%

-0.93%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.62%

-9.18%

-2.44%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.42%

3.36%

+0.06%

Volatility

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMAS.L) is 8.50%, while iShares MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF (ITWN.L) has a volatility of 9.68%. This indicates that XMAS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ITWN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMAS.LITWN.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.50%

9.68%

-1.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.87%

18.60%

-2.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.77%

22.88%

-4.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.27%

20.77%

+1.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.61%

20.55%

+2.06%

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMAS.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than ITWN.L's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMAS.L vs. ITWN.L - Dividend Comparison

XMAS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ITWN.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ITWN.L
iShares MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF		0.89%1.50%1.37%2.14%3.54%1.33%1.83%2.28%2.72%2.74%2.86%3.23%
XMAS.L
Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMAS.L and ITWN.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMAS.L is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMAS.L is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for ITWN.L.

XMAS.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while ITWN.L tracks MSCI Taiwan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XMAS.L and 0.74% for ITWN.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMAS.L and ITWN.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