XNAQ.L vs. FNCW.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XNAQ.L (Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C) and FNCW.L (SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XNAQ.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth TR USD, while FNCW.L is a Financials Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Financials NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XNAQ.L returned 24.81%/yr vs 20.93%/yr for FNCW.L. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XNAQ.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for FNCW.L.

Performance

XNAQ.L vs. FNCW.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 SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XNAQ.L achieves a 19.89% return, which is significantly higher than FNCW.L's 0.43% return.

XNAQ.L

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

FNCW.L

• 1D: 1.91%
• 1M: 1.20%
• YTD: 0.43%
• 6M: 3.40%
• 1Y: 15.81%
• 3Y*: 20.93%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XNAQ.L Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C	19.89%	11.71%	28.62%	47.83%	-21.22%
FNCW.L SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF	0.43%	20.39%	28.76%	9.92%	-0.09%

Correlation

The correlation between XNAQ.L and FNCW.L is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2022	0.52

The correlation between XNAQ.L and FNCW.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.42 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors	XNAQ.L	FNCW.L
Technology	53.7%	1.3%
Communication Services	15.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	-
Healthcare	4.2%	0.1%
Industrials	3.1%	0.2%
Utilities	1.4%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.1%	-
Energy	0.6%	0.1%
Financial Services	0.2%	98.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

XNAQ.L vs. FNCW.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

FNCW.L

FNCW.L Risk / Return Rank: 34
FNCW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FNCW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
FNCW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 33
FNCW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FNCW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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. FNCW.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 SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.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	FNCW.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.83	1.25	+1.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.70	1.80	+1.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.21	+0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.79	1.62	+2.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.13	5.15	+5.97
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. FNCW.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.83, which is higher than the FNCW.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XNAQ.L and FNCW.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	FNCW.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.83	1.25	+1.58
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.00	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.93	0.92	+0.01

Drawdowns

XNAQ.L vs. FNCW.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XNAQ.L drawdown since its inception was -27.52%, which is greater than FNCW.L's maximum drawdown of -16.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XNAQ.L and FNCW.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XNAQ.L	FNCW.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.52%	-16.31%	-11.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.99%	-9.55%	-1.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.56%	-16.31%	-8.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.52%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.63%	-1.13%	+0.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.01%	-3.76%	-3.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.75%	3.00%	+0.75%

Volatility

XNAQ.L vs. FNCW.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L) has a higher volatility of 4.18% compared to SPDR MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF (FNCW.L) at 3.46%. This indicates that XNAQ.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNCW.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XNAQ.L	FNCW.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.18%	3.46%	+0.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.38%	9.59%	+0.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.73%	12.41%	+2.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.04%	15.02%	+4.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.13%	15.02%	+4.11%

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

XNAQ.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than FNCW.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

XNAQ.L vs. FNCW.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

XNAQ.L and FNCW.L have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

On fees, XNAQ.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

XNAQ.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for FNCW.L.

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

XNAQ.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while FNCW.L is Financials Equities. XNAQ.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth TR USD, while FNCW.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XNAQ.L and 0.30% for FNCW.L.