XMAS.L vs. XDWT.L
XMAS.L (Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and XDWT.L (Xtrackers MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - XMAS.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while XDWT.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMAS.L returned 12.25%/yr vs 25.21%/yr for XDWT.L. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMAS.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XDWT.L.
Performance
XMAS.L vs. XDWT.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
XMAS.L is traded in GBp, while XDWT.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XDWT.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMAS.L achieves a 32.61% return, which is significantly higher than XDWT.L's 24.60% return. Over the past 10 years, XMAS.L has underperformed XDWT.L with an annualized return of 12.25%, while XDWT.L has yielded a comparatively higher 25.21% 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%
XDWT.L
- 1D
- -1.87%
- 1M
- 14.96%
- YTD
- 24.60%
- 6M
- 22.74%
- 1Y
- 52.87%
- 3Y*
- 29.51%
- 5Y*
- 22.68%
- 10Y*
- 25.21%
XMAS.L vs. XDWT.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
XDWT.L Xtrackers MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C | 24.60% | 13.70% | 36.24% | 47.09% | -23.22% | 31.09% | 40.22% | 40.71% | 2.60% | 25.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMAS.L and XDWT.L is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 25, 2016 | 0.42 |
Over the past year, XMAS.L and XDWT.L have become more correlated (0.66) than their long-term average of 0.42, meaning their price movements have been converging.
XMAS.L vs. XDWT.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Communication Services
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
-
Energy
Technology
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
Industrials
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
Healthcare
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
Communication Services
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
Financial Services
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
Consumer Cyclical
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
-
Consumer Defensive
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
-
Real Estate
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
-
Utilities
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
-
Basic Materials
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
-
Energy
XMAS.L
XDWT.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
XMAS.L vs. XDWT.L — Risk / Return Rank
XMAS.L
XDWT.L
XMAS.L vs. XDWT.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 MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C (XDWT.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 | XDWT.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.77 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.89 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.60 | 1.43 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.42 | 3.13 | +2.28 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.46 | 7.96 | +10.49 |
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
| XMAS.L | XDWT.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.37 | 2.60 | +0.77 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 | 1.00 | -0.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.83 | 1.16 | -0.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.43 | 1.16 | -0.73 |
Drawdowns
XMAS.L vs. XDWT.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMAS.L drawdown since its inception was -55.27%, which is greater than XDWT.L's maximum drawdown of -27.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAS.L and XDWT.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMAS.L | XDWT.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.27% | -27.95% | -27.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.65% | -16.79% | +5.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.75% | -27.95% | +10.20% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.81% | -27.95% | -0.86% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.23% | -27.95% | -6.28% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.73% | -2.32% | -0.41% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.62% | -5.64% | -5.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.42% | 6.62% | -3.20% |
Volatility
XMAS.L vs. XDWT.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 MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C (XDWT.L) at 7.48%. This indicates that XMAS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDWT.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMAS.L | XDWT.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.50% | 7.48% | +1.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.87% | 15.35% | +0.52% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.77% | 20.26% | -1.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.27% | 22.66% | -0.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.61% | 21.96% | +0.65% |
XMAS.L vs. XDWT.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMAS.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XDWT.L's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
XMAS.L vs. XDWT.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XMAS.L nor XDWT.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XMAS.L and XDWT.L have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XDWT.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XDWT.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for XMAS.L.
XMAS.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while XDWT.L is Technology Equities. XMAS.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while XDWT.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XMAS.L and 0.25% for XDWT.L.
Find the right allocation for XMAS.L and XDWT.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