PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.L) and Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XMAW.L is traded in GBp, while XNAQ.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the XNAQ.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMAW.L achieves a 11.58% return, which is significantly lower than XNAQ.L's 19.89% return.


XMAW.L

1D
-0.13%
1M
5.65%
YTD
11.58%
6M
12.10%
1Y
30.53%
3Y*
18.30%
5Y*
12.36%
10Y*
13.42%

XNAQ.L

1D
-0.63%
1M
9.63%
YTD
19.89%
6M
18.46%
1Y
41.84%
3Y*
24.81%
5Y*
18.96%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
XMAW.L
Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C
11.58%13.86%20.55%16.87%-10.40%18.91%
XNAQ.L
Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C
19.89%11.71%28.62%47.83%-25.44%26.22%

Correlation

The correlation between XMAW.L and XNAQ.L is 0.89, 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

0.89

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

0.88

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

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2021

0.89

The correlation between XMAW.L and XNAQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XMAW.L
XNAQ.L

Technology

31.4%
53.7%

Financial Services

17.2%
0.2%

Industrials

10.2%
3.1%

Communication Services

9.7%
15.8%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
12.2%

Healthcare

8.7%
4.2%

Basic Materials

3.4%
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

3.3%
7.7%

Energy

2.7%
0.6%

Real Estate

1.9%
0.1%

Utilities

1.9%
1.4%

Technology

XMAW.L
31.4%
XNAQ.L
53.7%

Financial Services

XMAW.L
17.2%
XNAQ.L
0.2%

Industrials

XMAW.L
10.2%
XNAQ.L
3.1%

Communication Services

XMAW.L
9.7%
XNAQ.L
15.8%

Consumer Cyclical

XMAW.L
9.6%
XNAQ.L
12.2%

Healthcare

XMAW.L
8.7%
XNAQ.L
4.2%

Basic Materials

XMAW.L
3.4%
XNAQ.L
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

XMAW.L
3.3%
XNAQ.L
7.7%

Energy

XMAW.L
2.7%
XNAQ.L
0.6%

Real Estate

XMAW.L
1.9%
XNAQ.L
0.1%

Utilities

XMAW.L
1.9%
XNAQ.L
1.4%

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

XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

XMAW.L
XMAW.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
XMAW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMAW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMAW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
XMAW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMAW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

XNAQ.L
XNAQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.L) and Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.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.


XMAW.LXNAQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

1.50

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.12

3.79

+0.34

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.61

11.13

+5.48

XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMAW.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is comparable to the XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAW.L and XNAQ.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


XMAW.LXNAQ.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.74

2.83

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

1.00

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.92

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

0.93

-0.07

Drawdowns

XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAW.L drawdown since its inception was -25.05%, smaller than the maximum XNAQ.L drawdown of -27.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAW.L and XNAQ.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMAW.LXNAQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.05%

-27.52%

+2.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.37%

-10.99%

+3.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.92%

-24.56%

+5.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.92%

-27.52%

+8.60%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.49%

-0.63%

+0.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.83%

-7.01%

+3.18%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.83%

3.75%

-1.92%

Volatility

XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI AC World ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XMAW.L) is 3.05%, while Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L) has a volatility of 4.18%. This indicates that XMAW.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XNAQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMAW.LXNAQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.05%

4.18%

-1.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.23%

10.38%

-2.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.09%

14.73%

-3.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.40%

19.04%

-5.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.60%

19.13%

-4.53%

XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMAW.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XNAQ.L's 0.20% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

XMAW.L vs. XNAQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMAW.L nor XNAQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XMAW.L and XNAQ.L have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

XNAQ.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XMAW.L.

XMAW.L is categorized as Global Equities, while XNAQ.L is Nasdaq-100. XMAW.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while XNAQ.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XMAW.L and 0.20% for XNAQ.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMAW.L and XNAQ.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