PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XMAS.L vs. XDJP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XMAS.L vs. XDJP.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 Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D (XDJP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with XMAS.L having a 32.61% return and XDJP.L slightly lower at 31.98%. Over the past 10 years, XMAS.L has underperformed XDJP.L with an annualized return of 12.25%, while XDJP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.14% 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%

XDJP.L

1D
-1.35%
1M
10.95%
YTD
31.98%
6M
29.24%
1Y
64.30%
3Y*
20.95%
5Y*
12.61%
10Y*
13.14%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMAS.L vs. XDJP.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%
XDJP.L
Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D
31.98%21.04%9.67%15.52%-10.26%-3.79%21.77%16.58%-3.53%14.73%

Correlation

The correlation between XMAS.L and XDJP.L is 0.62, 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

0.62

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

0.43

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

0.39

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

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 20, 2013

0.39

Over the past year, XMAS.L and XDJP.L have become more correlated (0.62) than their long-term average of 0.39, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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


Sectors
XMAS.L
XDJP.L

Technology

38.0%
31.9%

Industrials

17.2%
19.4%

Healthcare

14.3%
6.7%

Communication Services

9.7%
12.4%

Financial Services

8.6%
3.1%

Consumer Cyclical

6.4%
16.9%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
3.3%

Real Estate

0.9%
1.5%

Utilities

0.4%
0.2%

Basic Materials

0.2%
4.3%

Energy

0.0%
0.3%

Technology

XMAS.L
38.0%
XDJP.L
31.9%

Industrials

XMAS.L
17.2%
XDJP.L
19.4%

Healthcare

XMAS.L
14.3%
XDJP.L
6.7%

Communication Services

XMAS.L
9.7%
XDJP.L
12.4%

Financial Services

XMAS.L
8.6%
XDJP.L
3.1%

Consumer Cyclical

XMAS.L
6.4%
XDJP.L
16.9%

Consumer Defensive

XMAS.L
4.1%
XDJP.L
3.3%

Real Estate

XMAS.L
0.9%
XDJP.L
1.5%

Utilities

XMAS.L
0.4%
XDJP.L
0.2%

Basic Materials

XMAS.L
0.2%
XDJP.L
4.3%

Energy

XMAS.L
0.0%
XDJP.L
0.3%

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

XMAS.L vs. XDJP.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

XDJP.L
XDJP.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
XDJP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDJP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDJP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
XDJP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDJP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
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. XDJP.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 Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D (XDJP.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.LXDJP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.48

+0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.42

4.77

+0.64

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.46

14.50

+3.95

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

The current XMAS.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is comparable to the XDJP.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAS.L and XDJP.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.LXDJP.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.37

2.85

+0.52

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

0.71

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

0.78

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.43

0.75

-0.32

Drawdowns

XMAS.L vs. XDJP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAS.L drawdown since its inception was -55.27%, which is greater than XDJP.L's maximum drawdown of -23.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAS.L and XDJP.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMAS.LXDJP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-55.27%

-23.69%

-31.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.65%

-13.40%

+1.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.75%

-18.82%

+1.07%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.81%

-20.61%

-8.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.23%

-23.69%

-10.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.73%

-1.35%

-1.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.62%

-6.79%

-4.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.42%

4.42%

-1.00%

Volatility

XMAS.L vs. XDJP.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMAS.L) has a higher volatility of 8.50% compared to Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D (XDJP.L) at 6.75%. This indicates that XMAS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDJP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMAS.LXDJP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.50%

6.75%

+1.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.87%

17.68%

-1.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.77%

22.44%

-3.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.27%

17.72%

+4.55%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.61%

17.63%

+4.98%

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

XMAS.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XDJP.L's 0.09% expense ratio.


Dividends

XMAS.L vs. XDJP.L - Dividend Comparison

XMAS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XDJP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XDJP.L
Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D
1.04%1.33%1.41%1.59%2.47%1.20%1.11%1.13%1.24%0.72%0.83%0.16%
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 XDJP.L have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XDJP.L is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XDJP.L is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for XMAS.L.

XMAS.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while XDJP.L is Japan Equities. XMAS.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while XDJP.L tracks TOPIX TR JPY. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XMAS.L and 0.09% for XDJP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMAS.L and XDJP.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