XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XRSG.L (Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C) and XNAS.L (Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XRSG.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 TR USD, while XNAS.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XRSG.L returned 15.45%/yr vs 25.15%/yr for XNAS.L. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XRSG.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XNAS.L.

Performance

XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C (XRSG.L) and Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XRSG.L achieves a 17.87% return, which is significantly lower than XNAS.L's 20.93% return.

XRSG.L

• 1D: 1.10%
• 1M: 4.49%
• YTD: 17.87%
• 6M: 15.72%
• 1Y: 42.23%
• 3Y*: 15.45%
• 5Y*: 7.21%
• 10Y*: 11.37%

XNAS.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 10.24%
• YTD: 20.93%
• 6M: 19.10%
• 1Y: 42.68%
• 3Y*: 25.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XRSG.L Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C	17.87%	4.65%	11.80%	12.16%	-4.38%
XNAS.L Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF	20.16%	11.29%	28.81%	48.59%	-8.32%

Correlation

The correlation between XRSG.L and XNAS.L is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2022	0.58

The correlation between XRSG.L and XNAS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XRSG.L	XNAS.L
Industrials	17.7%	3.1%
Technology	17.1%	53.7%
Healthcare	16.4%	4.2%
Financial Services	15.7%	0.2%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	12.2%
Real Estate	6.1%	0.1%
Energy	6.0%	0.6%
Basic Materials	4.8%	1.1%
Utilities	2.9%	1.4%
Communication Services	2.5%	15.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	7.7%

Return for Risk

XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XRSG.L

XRSG.L Risk / Return Rank: 77
XRSG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
XRSG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
XRSG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 70
XRSG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XRSG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 76

XNAS.L

XNAS.L Risk / Return Rank: 76
XNAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
XNAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
XNAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 75
XNAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
XNAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C (XRSG.L) and Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.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.

	XRSG.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.49	2.68	-0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.35	3.56	-0.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.48	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.88	3.82	+1.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.33	10.85	+3.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XRSG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.49, which is comparable to the XNAS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XRSG.L and XNAS.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

	XRSG.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.49	2.68	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.36	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.49	1.41	-0.91

Drawdowns

XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XRSG.L drawdown since its inception was -35.31%, which is greater than XNAS.L's maximum drawdown of -24.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XRSG.L and XNAS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XRSG.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.31%	-24.49%	-10.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.61%	-11.08%	+2.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.09%	-24.49%	-5.60%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.09%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.03%	0.00%	-0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.72%	-3.85%	-4.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.94%	3.91%	-0.97%

Volatility

XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C (XRSG.L) has a higher volatility of 5.20% compared to Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L) at 4.93%. This indicates that XRSG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XNAS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XRSG.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.20%	4.93%	+0.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.83%	11.49%	+0.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.89%	15.78%	+1.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.04%	18.98%	+1.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.88%	18.98%	+1.90%

XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XRSG.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than XNAS.L's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

XRSG.L vs. XNAS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XRSG.L nor XNAS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XRSG.L and XNAS.L in my portfolio?

XRSG.L and XNAS.L have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XRSG.L or XNAS.L?

On fees, XNAS.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, XRSG.L or XNAS.L?

XNAS.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for XRSG.L.

What is the main difference between XRSG.L and XNAS.L?

XRSG.L is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while XNAS.L is Nasdaq-100. XRSG.L tracks Russell 2000 TR USD, while XNAS.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for XRSG.L and 0.20% for XNAS.L.