XNAQ.L vs. EQSG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XNAQ.L (Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C) and EQSG.L (Invesco Nasdaq-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) are both Nasdaq-100 funds tracking the Russell 1000 Growth TR USD, from Xtrackers and Invesco respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XNAQ.L returned 18.96%/yr vs 19.08%/yr for EQSG.L. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. Both charge a 0.20% expense ratio.

Performance

XNAQ.L vs. EQSG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L) and Invesco Nasdaq-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (EQSG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with XNAQ.L having a 19.89% return and EQSG.L slightly higher at 19.91%.

XNAQ.L

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 8.16%
• YTD: 19.89%
• 6M: 17.66%
• 1Y: 41.02%
• 3Y*: 24.81%
• 5Y*: 18.96%
• 10Y*: —

EQSG.L

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: 9.60%
• YTD: 19.91%
• 6M: 18.46%
• 1Y: 41.87%
• 3Y*: 24.92%
• 5Y*: 19.08%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
XNAQ.L Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C	19.89%	11.71%	28.62%	47.83%	-25.44%	31.13%
EQSG.L Invesco Nasdaq-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc	19.91%	11.73%	28.75%	48.14%	-25.92%	32.20%

Correlation

The correlation between XNAQ.L and EQSG.L is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 2021	0.98

The correlation between XNAQ.L and EQSG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors	XNAQ.L	EQSG.L
Technology	53.7%	53.7%
Communication Services	15.8%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	7.7%
Healthcare	4.2%	4.2%
Industrials	3.1%	3.1%
Utilities	1.4%	1.4%
Basic Materials	1.1%	1.1%
Energy	0.6%	0.6%
Financial Services	0.2%	0.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

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

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

XNAQ.L

XNAQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
XNAQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
XNAQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 83
XNAQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
XNAQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 62

EQSG.L

EQSG.L Risk / Return Rank: 37
EQSG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
EQSG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
EQSG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 79
EQSG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
EQSG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L) and Invesco Nasdaq-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (EQSG.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.

	XNAQ.L	EQSG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.83	0.94	+1.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.70	1.73	+1.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.47	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.79	1.36	+2.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.13	2.21	+8.91
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.83, which is higher than the EQSG.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XNAQ.L and EQSG.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XNAQ.L	EQSG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.83	0.94	+1.89
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.00	0.54	+0.46
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.93	0.55	+0.38

Drawdowns

XNAQ.L vs. EQSG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XNAQ.L drawdown since its inception was -27.52%, smaller than the maximum EQSG.L drawdown of -31.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XNAQ.L and EQSG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XNAQ.L	EQSG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.52%	-31.87%	+4.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.99%	-30.73%	+19.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.56%	-31.87%	+7.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.52%	-31.87%	+4.35%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.63%	-10.55%	+9.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.01%	-13.16%	+6.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.75%	18.86%	-15.11%

Volatility

XNAQ.L vs. EQSG.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L) and Invesco Nasdaq-100 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (EQSG.L) have volatilities of 4.18% and 4.19%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	XNAQ.L	EQSG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.18%	4.19%	-0.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.38%	10.27%	+0.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.73%	44.57%	-29.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.04%	35.45%	-16.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.13%	34.99%	-15.86%

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

Both XNAQ.L and EQSG.L have an expense ratio of 0.20%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XNAQ.L vs. EQSG.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XNAQ.L and EQSG.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, XNAQ.L and EQSG.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, XNAQ.L or EQSG.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.20% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XNAQ.L or EQSG.L?

XNAQ.L and EQSG.L have the same expense ratio: 0.20% per year.

What is the main difference between XNAQ.L and EQSG.L?

Both ETFs track Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Invesco.