PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XNAQ.L vs. XNGS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XNAQ.L vs. XNGS.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 Xtrackers MSCI Next Generation Internet Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XNGS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XNAQ.L achieves a 19.89% return, which is significantly higher than XNGS.L's 17.59% 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*

XNGS.L

1D
-0.89%
1M
11.45%
YTD
17.59%
6M
14.12%
1Y
33.45%
3Y*
27.39%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
XNAQ.L
Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C
19.89%11.71%28.62%47.83%-12.88%
XNGS.L
Xtrackers MSCI Next Generation Internet Innovation UCITS ETF 1C
17.59%11.63%38.09%48.85%-12.98%

Correlation

The correlation between XNAQ.L and XNGS.L is 0.91, 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

0.91

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

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 21, 2022

0.93

The correlation between XNAQ.L and XNGS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

XNAQ.L vs. XNGS.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: 7878
Overall Rank
XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
XNAQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank

XNGS.L
XNGS.L Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
XNGS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XNGS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
XNGS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
XNGS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
XNGS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
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.

XNAQ.L vs. XNGS.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 Xtrackers MSCI Next Generation Internet Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XNGS.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.LXNGS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.82

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.00

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.35

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.79

1.69

+2.10

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.13

4.24

+6.89

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

The current XNAQ.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.83, which is higher than the XNGS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XNAQ.L and XNGS.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


XNAQ.LXNGS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.83

2.00

+0.82

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

1.24

-0.31

Drawdowns

XNAQ.L vs. XNGS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XNAQ.L drawdown since its inception was -27.52%, which is greater than XNGS.L's maximum drawdown of -24.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XNAQ.L and XNGS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XNAQ.LXNGS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.52%

-24.85%

-2.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.99%

-20.19%

+9.20%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.56%

-24.85%

+0.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.52%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.63%

-1.31%

+0.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.01%

-5.28%

-1.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.75%

8.05%

-4.30%

Volatility

XNAQ.L vs. XNGS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers Nasdaq 100 UCITS ETF 1C (XNAQ.L) is 4.18%, while Xtrackers MSCI Next Generation Internet Innovation UCITS ETF 1C (XNGS.L) has a volatility of 5.17%. This indicates that XNAQ.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XNGS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XNAQ.LXNGS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.18%

5.17%

-0.99%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.38%

12.50%

-2.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.73%

16.97%

-2.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.04%

19.86%

-0.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.13%

19.86%

-0.73%

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

XNAQ.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than XNGS.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

XNAQ.L vs. XNGS.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, XNAQ.L and XNGS.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.

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.

XNAQ.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for XNGS.L.

XNAQ.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while XNGS.L is Technology Equities. XNAQ.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth TR USD, while XNGS.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XNAQ.L and 0.35% for XNGS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XNAQ.L and XNGS.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