PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XRSS.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF 1C (XDEQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XRSS.L achieves a 10.42% return, which is significantly higher than XDEQ.L's 8.63% return. Over the past 10 years, XRSS.L has outperformed XDEQ.L with an annualized return of 14.67%, while XDEQ.L has yielded a comparatively lower 13.78% annualized return.


XRSS.L

1D
0.06%
1M
6.12%
YTD
10.42%
6M
10.27%
1Y
29.91%
3Y*
19.76%
5Y*
14.37%
10Y*
14.67%

XDEQ.L

1D
0.92%
1M
4.55%
YTD
8.63%
6M
9.20%
1Y
22.27%
3Y*
15.29%
5Y*
11.55%
10Y*
13.78%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XRSS.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C
10.42%9.60%28.26%22.69%-11.96%29.11%12.54%25.48%-5.60%7.52%
XDEQ.L
Xtrackers MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF 1C
8.63%7.52%18.91%19.22%-9.44%24.28%11.14%30.48%-5.16%12.25%

Correlation

The correlation between XRSS.L and XDEQ.L is 0.88, 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

0.88

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

0.92

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

0.93

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

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2015

0.68

The correlation between XRSS.L and XDEQ.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (all time) to 0.93 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XRSS.L
XDEQ.L

Technology

37.9%
30.4%

Financial Services

12.4%
14.7%

Communication Services

12.1%
9.1%

Consumer Cyclical

10.8%
8.9%

Healthcare

9.2%
9.2%

Industrials

7.7%
10.1%

Consumer Defensive

2.7%
5.3%

Real Estate

2.1%
1.7%

Energy

2.0%
4.6%

Basic Materials

1.9%
3.2%

Utilities

1.3%
2.7%

Technology

XRSS.L
37.9%
XDEQ.L
30.4%

Financial Services

XRSS.L
12.4%
XDEQ.L
14.7%

Communication Services

XRSS.L
12.1%
XDEQ.L
9.1%

Consumer Cyclical

XRSS.L
10.8%
XDEQ.L
8.9%

Healthcare

XRSS.L
9.2%
XDEQ.L
9.2%

Industrials

XRSS.L
7.7%
XDEQ.L
10.1%

Consumer Defensive

XRSS.L
2.7%
XDEQ.L
5.3%

Real Estate

XRSS.L
2.1%
XDEQ.L
1.7%

Energy

XRSS.L
2.0%
XDEQ.L
4.6%

Basic Materials

XRSS.L
1.9%
XDEQ.L
3.2%

Utilities

XRSS.L
1.3%
XDEQ.L
2.7%

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

XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XRSS.L
XRSS.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
XRSS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XRSS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
XRSS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
XRSS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
XRSS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

XDEQ.L
XDEQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
XDEQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDEQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDEQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
XDEQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDEQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XRSS.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF 1C (XDEQ.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.


XRSS.LXDEQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.43

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.30

3.21

+0.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.44

13.32

-1.88

XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XRSS.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.61, which is comparable to the XDEQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XRSS.L and XDEQ.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


XRSS.LXDEQ.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.61

2.26

+0.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.94

0.87

+0.06

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.88

1.13

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.78

1.21

-0.43

Drawdowns

XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XRSS.L drawdown since its inception was -33.00%, which is greater than XDEQ.L's maximum drawdown of -23.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XRSS.L and XDEQ.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XRSS.LXDEQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.00%

-23.79%

-9.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.02%

-6.90%

-2.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.42%

-17.96%

-4.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.42%

-17.96%

-4.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.00%

-23.79%

-9.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.17%

0.00%

-0.17%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.64%

-3.78%

-0.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.61%

1.67%

+0.94%

Volatility

XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG Screened UCITS ETF 1C (XRSS.L) has a higher volatility of 2.86% compared to Xtrackers MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF 1C (XDEQ.L) at 2.57%. This indicates that XRSS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XDEQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XRSS.LXDEQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.86%

2.57%

+0.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.80%

7.12%

+0.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.42%

9.81%

+1.61%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.31%

13.37%

+1.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.75%

16.89%

-0.14%

XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XRSS.L has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than XDEQ.L's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

XRSS.L vs. XDEQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XRSS.L nor XDEQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XRSS.L and XDEQ.L have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XRSS.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XRSS.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDEQ.L.

XRSS.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while XDEQ.L is Global Equities. XRSS.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while XDEQ.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for XRSS.L and 0.25% for XDEQ.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XRSS.L and XDEQ.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