PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C (XMTW.L) and Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMTW.L achieves a 67.90% return, which is significantly higher than CI2G.L's -12.55% return. Over the past 10 years, XMTW.L has outperformed CI2G.L with an annualized return of 23.25%, while CI2G.L has yielded a comparatively lower 7.30% annualized return.


XMTW.L

1D
-1.55%
1M
14.93%
YTD
67.90%
6M
73.86%
1Y
118.61%
3Y*
41.00%
5Y*
23.21%
10Y*
23.25%

CI2G.L

1D
1.23%
1M
-1.71%
YTD
-12.55%
6M
-12.47%
1Y
-12.13%
3Y*
1.96%
5Y*
3.82%
10Y*
7.30%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMTW.L
Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C
67.90%23.98%25.99%21.66%-21.11%28.96%32.40%29.87%-3.71%16.78%
CI2G.L
Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD
-12.55%-5.46%11.34%12.20%2.39%24.86%10.51%1.30%-2.46%24.58%

Correlation

The correlation between XMTW.L and CI2G.L is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.23

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

0.24

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

0.29

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

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2015

0.45

Over the past year, the correlation between XMTW.L and CI2G.L has dropped to 0.23 - well below their long-term average of 0.45, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XMTW.L
CI2G.L

Technology

78.9%
8.2%

Financial Services

11.8%
28.3%

Industrials

2.8%
10.2%

Basic Materials

2.4%
8.5%

Communication Services

1.5%
4.7%

Consumer Cyclical

1.2%
12.4%

Consumer Defensive

0.8%
6.2%

Healthcare

0.6%
6.1%

Energy

-

9.5%

Real Estate

-

1.3%

Utilities

-

4.5%

Technology

XMTW.L
78.9%
CI2G.L
8.2%

Financial Services

XMTW.L
11.8%
CI2G.L
28.3%

Industrials

XMTW.L
2.8%
CI2G.L
10.2%

Basic Materials

XMTW.L
2.4%
CI2G.L
8.5%

Communication Services

XMTW.L
1.5%
CI2G.L
4.7%

Consumer Cyclical

XMTW.L
1.2%
CI2G.L
12.4%

Consumer Defensive

XMTW.L
0.8%
CI2G.L
6.2%

Healthcare

XMTW.L
0.6%
CI2G.L
6.1%

Energy

XMTW.L

-

CI2G.L
9.5%

Real Estate

XMTW.L

-

CI2G.L
1.3%

Utilities

XMTW.L

-

CI2G.L
4.5%

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

XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMTW.L
XMTW.L Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
XMTW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMTW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMTW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
XMTW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMTW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

CI2G.L
CI2G.L Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
CI2G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CI2G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
CI2G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
CI2G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
CI2G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 22
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.

XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C (XMTW.L) and Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.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.


XMTW.LCI2G.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+5.97

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+6.87

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.84

0.89

+0.95

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

13.03

-0.59

+13.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

36.03

-1.37

+37.40

XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMTW.L Sharpe Ratio is 5.22, which is higher than the CI2G.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMTW.L and CI2G.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


XMTW.LCI2G.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.22

-0.75

+5.97

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.13

0.24

+0.90

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.16

0.37

+0.79

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.66

0.40

+0.26

Drawdowns

XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMTW.L drawdown since its inception was -47.86%, which is greater than CI2G.L's maximum drawdown of -37.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMTW.L and CI2G.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMTW.LCI2G.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.86%

-37.13%

-10.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.05%

-20.32%

+11.27%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.76%

-27.30%

-1.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.18%

-27.30%

-2.88%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.18%

-37.13%

+6.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.57%

-23.55%

+21.98%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.70%

-7.24%

-1.46%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.28%

8.84%

-5.56%

Volatility

XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C (XMTW.L) has a higher volatility of 9.41% compared to Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L) at 5.70%. This indicates that XMTW.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CI2G.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMTW.LCI2G.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.41%

5.70%

+3.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.21%

13.70%

+4.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.59%

16.10%

+6.49%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.47%

16.04%

+4.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.06%

19.77%

+0.29%

XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMTW.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than CI2G.L's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

XMTW.L vs. CI2G.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMTW.L nor CI2G.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XMTW.L and CI2G.L have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMTW.L is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMTW.L is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for CI2G.L.

XMTW.L tracks MSCI Taiwan NR USD, while CI2G.L tracks MSCI India NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XMTW.L and 0.80% for CI2G.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMTW.L and CI2G.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