PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMWD.L vs. INFR.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMWD.L (Xtrackers MSCI World Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and INFR.L (iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - XMWD.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while INFR.L is a Utilities Equities fund tracking the FTSE Global Core Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMWD.L returned 13.01%/yr vs 7.87%/yr for INFR.L. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMWD.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for INFR.L.

Performance

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI World Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMWD.L) and iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INFR.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMWD.L achieves a 9.93% return, which is significantly higher than INFR.L's 9.25% return. Over the past 10 years, XMWD.L has outperformed INFR.L with an annualized return of 13.01%, while INFR.L has yielded a comparatively lower 7.87% annualized return.

XMWD.L

1D
0.03%
1M
4.02%
YTD
9.93%
6M
10.99%
1Y
25.86%
3Y*
20.70%
5Y*
11.74%
10Y*
13.01%

INFR.L

1D
-1.19%
1M
-3.06%
YTD
9.25%
6M
9.24%
1Y
15.19%
3Y*
12.15%
5Y*
6.48%
10Y*
7.87%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMWD.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Swap UCITS ETF 1C		9.93%21.37%18.35%23.76%-17.92%22.03%16.04%28.32%-9.21%22.09%
INFR.L
iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		9.25%13.90%9.63%0.06%-5.54%18.46%-1.78%25.66%-1.52%15.44%

Correlation

The correlation between XMWD.L and INFR.L is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.12

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

0.30

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

0.43

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

0.48

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2007

0.49

Over the past year, the correlation between XMWD.L and INFR.L has dropped to 0.12 - well below their long-term average of 0.49, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMWD.L
INFR.L

Technology

28.3%
0.7%

Financial Services

15.7%
0.0%

Industrials

11.4%
20.8%

Consumer Cyclical

9.3%

-

Communication Services

9.3%
1.0%

Healthcare

8.8%

-

Consumer Defensive

5.2%

-

Energy

4.2%
16.4%

Basic Materials

3.3%

-

Utilities

2.7%
56.0%

Real Estate

1.9%
5.0%

Technology

XMWD.L
28.3%
INFR.L
0.7%

Financial Services

XMWD.L
15.7%
INFR.L
0.0%

Industrials

XMWD.L
11.4%
INFR.L
20.8%

Consumer Cyclical

XMWD.L
9.3%
INFR.L

-

Communication Services

XMWD.L
9.3%
INFR.L
1.0%

Healthcare

XMWD.L
8.8%
INFR.L

-

Consumer Defensive

XMWD.L
5.2%
INFR.L

-

Energy

XMWD.L
4.2%
INFR.L
16.4%

Basic Materials

XMWD.L
3.3%
INFR.L

-

Utilities

XMWD.L
2.7%
INFR.L
56.0%

Real Estate

XMWD.L
1.9%
INFR.L
5.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Xtrackers MSCI World Swap UCITS ETF 1C

iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist)

Often compared with XMWD.L:
XMWD.L vs. VXUSXMWD.L vs. ACWI.LXMWD.L vs. XLKQ.LXMWD.L vs. SWDA.LXMWD.L vs. PHPP.LXMWD.L vs. BATG.LXMWD.L vs. GLD
Often compared with INFR.L:
INFR.L vs. DPGT.LINFR.L vs. IWDA.LINFR.L vs. IUIT.LINFR.L vs. ARCK.LINFR.L vs. FWRG.LINFR.L vs. IDWR.LINFR.L vs. WUTI.L

Return for Risk

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMWD.L
XMWD.L Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
XMWD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMWD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMWD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
XMWD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMWD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
INFR.L
INFR.L Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
INFR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
INFR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
INFR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
INFR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
INFR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
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.

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMWD.L) and iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INFR.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.

XMWD.LINFR.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.17
1.44

+0.73

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.24
2.06

+1.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.26

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.03

2.95

+0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.02

8.36

+4.66

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMWD.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.17, which is higher than the INFR.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMWD.L and INFR.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

XMWD.LINFR.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.17

1.44

+0.73

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.76

0.47

+0.29

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

0.53

+0.31

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.43

0.32

+0.12

Drawdowns

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMWD.L drawdown since its inception was -56.59%, which is greater than INFR.L's maximum drawdown of -48.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMWD.L and INFR.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMWD.LINFR.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.59%

-48.40%

-8.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.50%

-5.13%

-3.37%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.55%

-14.58%

-2.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.94%

-21.88%

-4.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.04%

-34.60%

+0.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.44%

-3.68%

+3.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.96%

-9.57%

+1.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.98%

1.81%

+0.17%

Volatility

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI World Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMWD.L) and iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INFR.L) have volatilities of 3.41% and 3.57%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMWD.LINFR.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.41%

3.57%

-0.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.13%

8.67%

+0.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.86%

10.51%

+1.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.17%

13.70%

+2.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.70%

14.79%

+1.91%

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMWD.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than INFR.L's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMWD.L vs. INFR.L - Dividend Comparison

XMWD.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while INFR.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
INFR.L
iShares Global Infrastructure UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		2.82%2.97%2.96%3.02%2.54%2.60%2.84%2.70%2.99%3.51%3.45%4.75%
XMWD.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Swap 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

XMWD.L and INFR.L have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

XMWD.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for INFR.L.

XMWD.L is categorized as Global Equities, while INFR.L is Utilities Equities. XMWD.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while INFR.L tracks FTSE Global Core Infrastructure Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for XMWD.L and 0.65% for INFR.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMWD.L and INFR.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