XMAS.L vs. KRWL.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMAS.L (Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and KRWL.L (Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - XMAS.L tracks the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD while KRWL.L tracks the MSCI Korea NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMAS.L returned 9.51%/yr vs 19.95%/yr for KRWL.L. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMAS.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for KRWL.L.

Performance

XMAS.L vs. KRWL.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 Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc (KRWL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMAS.L achieves a 32.61% return, which is significantly lower than KRWL.L's 106.66% 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%

KRWL.L

• 1D: -4.89%
• 1M: 16.79%
• YTD: 106.66%
• 6M: 125.77%
• 1Y: 237.10%
• 3Y*: 45.48%
• 5Y*: 19.95%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
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%	-9.84%
KRWL.L Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc	106.66%	86.86%	-21.27%	13.04%	-19.64%	-7.54%	38.43%	7.15%	-12.12%

Correlation

The correlation between XMAS.L and KRWL.L is 0.71, 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	0.71
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2018	0.54

The correlation between XMAS.L and KRWL.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (5 years) to 0.71 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors	XMAS.L	KRWL.L
Technology	38.0%	42.8%
Industrials	17.2%	4.1%
Healthcare	14.3%	12.8%
Communication Services	9.7%	11.7%
Financial Services	8.6%	1.8%
Consumer Cyclical	6.4%	10.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.1%	10.1%
Real Estate	0.9%	2.0%
Utilities	0.4%	2.1%
Basic Materials	0.2%	0.4%
Energy	0.0%	1.2%

Return for Risk

XMAS.L vs. KRWL.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: 91
XMAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
XMAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
XMAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 92
XMAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
XMAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 87

KRWL.L

KRWL.L Risk / Return Rank: 97
KRWL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
KRWL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
KRWL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 96
KRWL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
KRWL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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. KRWL.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 Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc (KRWL.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.L	KRWL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.37	6.22	-2.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.27	5.50	-1.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.80	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.42	10.93	-5.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.46	38.59	-20.14
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. KRWL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMAS.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is lower than the KRWL.L Sharpe Ratio of 6.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAS.L and KRWL.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XMAS.L	KRWL.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.37	6.22	-2.86
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68	0.78	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.83	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	0.61	-0.18

Drawdowns

XMAS.L vs. KRWL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAS.L drawdown since its inception was -55.27%, which is greater than KRWL.L's maximum drawdown of -44.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAS.L and KRWL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMAS.L	KRWL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.27%	-44.10%	-11.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.65%	-21.55%	+9.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.75%	-28.42%	+10.67%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.81%	-40.54%	+11.73%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.23%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.73%	-5.36%	+2.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.62%	-19.40%	+7.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.42%	6.11%	-2.69%

Volatility

XMAS.L vs. KRWL.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMAS.L) is 8.50%, while Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc (KRWL.L) has a volatility of 17.51%. This indicates that XMAS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KRWL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMAS.L	KRWL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.50%	17.51%	-9.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.87%	32.27%	-16.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.77%	37.87%	-19.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.27%	25.51%	-3.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.61%	25.79%	-3.18%

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

XMAS.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than KRWL.L's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMAS.L vs. KRWL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMAS.L nor KRWL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMAS.L and KRWL.L in my portfolio?

XMAS.L and KRWL.L have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XMAS.L or KRWL.L?

On fees, KRWL.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMAS.L or KRWL.L?

KRWL.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for XMAS.L.

What is the main difference between XMAS.L and KRWL.L?

XMAS.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while KRWL.L tracks MSCI Korea NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XMAS.L and 0.45% for KRWL.L.