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

Performance

XMTW.L vs. HMAF.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 HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD (HMAF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMTW.L achieves a 67.90% return, which is significantly higher than HMAF.L's 36.25% return. Over the past 10 years, XMTW.L has outperformed HMAF.L with an annualized return of 23.25%, while HMAF.L has yielded a comparatively lower 12.09% 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%

HMAF.L

1D
-2.32%
1M
8.81%
YTD
36.25%
6M
39.16%
1Y
73.09%
3Y*
25.41%
5Y*
9.34%
10Y*
12.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMTW.L vs. HMAF.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%
HMAF.L
HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD
36.25%31.76%13.79%-3.80%-12.60%-7.57%21.71%13.88%-10.05%29.41%

Correlation

The correlation between XMTW.L and HMAF.L is 0.80, 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

0.80

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

0.74

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

0.73

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

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2013

0.79

The correlation between XMTW.L and HMAF.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

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


Sectors
XMTW.L
HMAF.L

Technology

78.9%
51.5%

Financial Services

11.8%
14.9%

Industrials

2.8%
7.3%

Basic Materials

2.4%
2.4%

Communication Services

1.5%
6.5%

Consumer Cyclical

1.2%
9.3%

Consumer Defensive

0.8%
1.6%

Healthcare

0.6%
2.2%

Energy

-

1.4%

Real Estate

-

1.6%

Utilities

-

1.3%

Technology

XMTW.L
78.9%
HMAF.L
51.5%

Financial Services

XMTW.L
11.8%
HMAF.L
14.9%

Industrials

XMTW.L
2.8%
HMAF.L
7.3%

Basic Materials

XMTW.L
2.4%
HMAF.L
2.4%

Communication Services

XMTW.L
1.5%
HMAF.L
6.5%

Consumer Cyclical

XMTW.L
1.2%
HMAF.L
9.3%

Consumer Defensive

XMTW.L
0.8%
HMAF.L
1.6%

Healthcare

XMTW.L
0.6%
HMAF.L
2.2%

Energy

XMTW.L

-

HMAF.L
1.4%

Real Estate

XMTW.L

-

HMAF.L
1.6%

Utilities

XMTW.L

-

HMAF.L
1.3%

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. HMAF.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

HMAF.L
HMAF.L Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
HMAF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMAF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMAF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
HMAF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMAF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
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. HMAF.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 HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD (HMAF.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.LHMAF.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.84

1.67

+0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

13.03

6.85

+6.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

36.03

22.75

+13.28

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

The current XMTW.L Sharpe Ratio is 5.22, which is higher than the HMAF.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMTW.L and HMAF.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.LHMAF.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.22

3.84

+1.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.13

0.49

+0.64

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.16

0.64

+0.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.66

0.54

+0.12

Drawdowns

XMTW.L vs. HMAF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMTW.L drawdown since its inception was -47.86%, which is greater than HMAF.L's maximum drawdown of -39.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMTW.L and HMAF.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMTW.LHMAF.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.86%

-39.58%

-8.28%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.05%

-10.62%

+1.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.76%

-19.52%

-9.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.18%

-34.30%

+4.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.18%

-39.58%

+9.40%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.57%

-3.05%

+1.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.70%

-12.55%

+3.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.28%

3.20%

+0.08%

Volatility

XMTW.L vs. HMAF.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C (XMTW.L) has a higher volatility of 9.41% compared to HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD (HMAF.L) at 8.65%. This indicates that XMTW.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HMAF.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMTW.LHMAF.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.41%

8.65%

+0.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.21%

15.96%

+2.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.59%

18.95%

+3.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.47%

19.03%

+1.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.06%

18.99%

+1.07%

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

XMTW.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than HMAF.L's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

XMTW.L vs. HMAF.L - Dividend Comparison

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


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HMAF.L
HSBC MSCI AC Far East ex Japan UCITS ETF USD
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%1.59%
XMTW.L
Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


XMTW.L and HMAF.L have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HMAF.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HMAF.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for XMTW.L.

XMTW.L tracks MSCI Taiwan NR USD, while HMAF.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XMTW.L and 0.45% for HMAF.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMTW.L and HMAF.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