PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMMS.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XMMS.L is traded in GBp, while XDWH.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XDWH.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMMS.L achieves a 26.72% return, which is significantly higher than XDWH.L's -2.35% return.


XMMS.L

1D
-1.59%
1M
6.34%
YTD
26.72%
6M
27.92%
1Y
53.72%
3Y*
20.94%
5Y*
8.45%
10Y*

XDWH.L

1D
2.99%
1M
4.20%
YTD
-2.35%
6M
-2.32%
1Y
12.65%
3Y*
2.85%
5Y*
5.67%
10Y*
8.66%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
XMMS.L
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C
26.72%24.71%9.13%2.81%-10.67%-1.61%13.55%14.48%-8.71%
XDWH.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C
-2.35%7.04%2.51%-1.38%5.83%21.71%9.57%18.28%6.59%

Correlation

The correlation between XMMS.L and XDWH.L is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.13

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

0.18

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

0.23

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 25, 2018

0.36

Over the past year, the correlation between XMMS.L and XDWH.L has dropped to 0.13 - well below their long-term average of 0.36, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XMMS.L
XDWH.L

Technology

36.9%

-

Financial Services

19.5%

-

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%

-

Industrials

7.4%

-

Communication Services

7.0%

-

Basic Materials

6.5%

-

Energy

4.1%

-

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
0.5%

Healthcare

2.9%
98.9%

Utilities

2.1%

-

Real Estate

1.1%

-

Technology

XMMS.L
36.9%
XDWH.L

-

Financial Services

XMMS.L
19.5%
XDWH.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

XMMS.L
9.6%
XDWH.L

-

Industrials

XMMS.L
7.4%
XDWH.L

-

Communication Services

XMMS.L
7.0%
XDWH.L

-

Basic Materials

XMMS.L
6.5%
XDWH.L

-

Energy

XMMS.L
4.1%
XDWH.L

-

Consumer Defensive

XMMS.L
3.0%
XDWH.L
0.5%

Healthcare

XMMS.L
2.9%
XDWH.L
98.9%

Utilities

XMMS.L
2.1%
XDWH.L

-

Real Estate

XMMS.L
1.1%
XDWH.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

XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMMS.L
XMMS.L Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
XMMS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMMS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMMS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
XMMS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMMS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

XDWH.L
XDWH.L Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDWH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
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.

XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMMS.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.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.


XMMS.LXDWH.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.72

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

1.16

+0.42

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.84

1.21

+3.64

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.09

3.15

+13.95

XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMMS.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.17, which is higher than the XDWH.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMMS.L and XDWH.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


XMMS.LXDWH.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.17

0.86

+2.30

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

0.40

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.56

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.45

0.59

-0.14

Drawdowns

XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMMS.L drawdown since its inception was -27.76%, which is greater than XDWH.L's maximum drawdown of -18.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMMS.L and XDWH.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMMS.LXDWH.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.76%

-18.80%

-8.96%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.04%

-10.43%

-0.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.26%

-18.80%

+3.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.32%

-18.80%

-5.52%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.80%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.42%

-5.80%

+3.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.00%

-4.41%

-5.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.13%

4.01%

-0.88%

Volatility

XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMMS.L) has a higher volatility of 7.37% compared to Xtrackers MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF 1C (XDWH.L) at 5.30%. This indicates that XMMS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDWH.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMMS.LXDWH.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.37%

5.30%

+2.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.36%

10.98%

+3.38%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.90%

14.58%

+2.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.56%

14.02%

+2.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.84%

15.50%

+3.34%

XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMMS.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than XDWH.L's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

XMMS.L vs. XDWH.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMMS.L nor XDWH.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XMMS.L and XDWH.L have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMMS.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMMS.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDWH.L.

XMMS.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while XDWH.L is Health & Biotech Equities. XMMS.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while XDWH.L tracks MSCI World/Health Care NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for XMMS.L and 0.25% for XDWH.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMMS.L and XDWH.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