XMAS.L vs. XNAS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMAS.L (Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and XNAS.L (Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMAS.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while XNAS.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XMAS.L returned 24.06%/yr vs 25.15%/yr for XNAS.L. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMAS.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XNAS.L.

Performance

XMAS.L vs. XNAS.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 NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

XMAS.L is traded in GBp, while XNAS.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XNAS.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 XNAS.L's 20.93% 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%

XNAS.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 10.24%
• YTD: 20.93%
• 6M: 19.10%
• 1Y: 42.68%
• 3Y*: 25.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XMAS.L Xtrackers MSCI EM Asia ESG Screened Swap UCITS ETF 1C	32.61%	25.07%	17.38%	-2.13%	7.97%
XNAS.L Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF	20.16%	11.29%	28.81%	48.59%	-8.32%

Correlation

The correlation between XMAS.L and XNAS.L is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2022	0.41

Over the past year, XMAS.L and XNAS.L have become more correlated (0.64) than their long-term average of 0.41, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

Sectors	XMAS.L	XNAS.L
Technology	38.0%	53.7%
Industrials	17.2%	3.1%
Healthcare	14.3%	4.2%
Communication Services	9.7%	15.8%
Financial Services	8.6%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	6.4%	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	4.1%	7.7%
Real Estate	0.9%	0.1%
Utilities	0.4%	1.4%
Basic Materials	0.2%	1.1%
Energy	0.0%	0.6%

Return for Risk

XMAS.L vs. XNAS.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

XNAS.L

XNAS.L Risk / Return Rank: 76
XNAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
XNAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
XNAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 75
XNAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
XNAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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. XNAS.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 NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.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	XNAS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.37	2.68	+0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.27	3.56	+0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.48	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.42	3.82	+1.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.46	10.85	+7.61
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. XNAS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMAS.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is comparable to the XNAS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAS.L and XNAS.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	XNAS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.37	2.68	+0.69
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68	—	—
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	1.41	-0.98

Drawdowns

XMAS.L vs. XNAS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAS.L drawdown since its inception was -55.27%, which is greater than XNAS.L's maximum drawdown of -24.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAS.L and XNAS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMAS.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.27%	-24.49%	-30.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.65%	-11.08%	-0.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.75%	-24.49%	+6.74%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.81%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.23%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.73%	0.00%	-2.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.62%	-3.85%	-7.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.42%	3.91%	-0.49%

Volatility

XMAS.L vs. XNAS.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 NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L) at 4.93%. This indicates that XMAS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XNAS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMAS.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.50%	4.93%	+3.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.87%	11.49%	+4.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.77%	15.78%	+2.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.27%	18.98%	+3.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.61%	18.98%	+3.63%

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

XMAS.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XNAS.L's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMAS.L vs. XNAS.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

XMAS.L and XNAS.L have a correlation of 0.64, 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 XNAS.L?

On fees, XNAS.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

XNAS.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for XMAS.L.

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

XMAS.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while XNAS.L is Nasdaq-100. XMAS.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while XNAS.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XMAS.L and 0.20% for XNAS.L.