PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI USA Banks UCITS ETF 1D (XUFB.L) and Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XUFB.L achieves a -0.52% return, which is significantly higher than XLFS.L's -4.53% return.


XUFB.L

1D
4.38%
1M
2.37%
YTD
-0.52%
6M
2.50%
1Y
27.56%
3Y*
27.41%
5Y*
10.89%
10Y*

XLFS.L

1D
3.23%
1M
2.25%
YTD
-4.53%
6M
-2.67%
1Y
4.66%
3Y*
15.52%
5Y*
9.11%
10Y*
13.02%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
XUFB.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA Banks UCITS ETF 1D
-0.52%23.40%40.02%5.21%-10.18%37.53%-18.78%35.43%-8.04%
XLFS.L
Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc
-4.53%6.80%32.42%6.51%-0.45%37.46%-7.35%27.94%-5.50%

Correlation

The correlation between XUFB.L and XLFS.L is 0.83, 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

0.83

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

0.81

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

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2018

0.81

The correlation between XUFB.L and XLFS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XUFB.L
XLFS.L

Financial Services

100.0%
98.4%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

0.2%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

1.6%

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

XUFB.L
100.0%
XLFS.L
98.4%

Basic Materials

XUFB.L

-

XLFS.L

-

Communication Services

XUFB.L

-

XLFS.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

XUFB.L

-

XLFS.L

-

Consumer Defensive

XUFB.L

-

XLFS.L

-

Energy

XUFB.L

-

XLFS.L

-

Healthcare

XUFB.L

-

XLFS.L

-

Industrials

XUFB.L

-

XLFS.L
0.2%

Real Estate

XUFB.L

-

XLFS.L

-

Technology

XUFB.L

-

XLFS.L
1.6%

Utilities

XUFB.L

-

XLFS.L

-

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

XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XUFB.L
XUFB.L Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
XUFB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XUFB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
XUFB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
XUFB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
XUFB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank

XLFS.L
XLFS.L Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
XLFS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLFS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
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.

XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI USA Banks UCITS ETF 1D (XUFB.L) and Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.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.


XUFB.LXLFS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.36

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.06

+0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.92

0.35

+1.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.08

0.85

+4.23

XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XUFB.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is higher than the XLFS.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XUFB.L and XLFS.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


XUFB.LXLFS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.36

0.31

+1.05

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

0.49

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

0.61

-0.17

Drawdowns

XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XUFB.L drawdown since its inception was -41.84%, which is greater than XLFS.L's maximum drawdown of -35.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XUFB.L and XLFS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XUFB.LXLFS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.84%

-35.78%

-6.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.33%

-13.13%

-1.20%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.91%

-18.78%

-9.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.18%

-18.78%

-15.40%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.68%

-6.47%

+2.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.33%

-6.60%

-5.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.41%

5.45%

-0.04%

Volatility

XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI USA Banks UCITS ETF 1D (XUFB.L) has a higher volatility of 6.55% compared to Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.L) at 4.68%. This indicates that XUFB.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLFS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XUFB.LXLFS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.55%

4.68%

+1.87%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.77%

11.44%

+4.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.12%

14.92%

+5.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.14%

18.54%

+5.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.85%

20.81%

+8.04%

XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XUFB.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than XLFS.L's 0.14% 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

XUFB.L vs. XLFS.L - Dividend Comparison

XUFB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.76%, while XLFS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
XLFS.L
Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XUFB.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA Banks UCITS ETF 1D
1.76%1.71%1.92%2.54%3.43%1.76%

Frequently Asked Questions


XUFB.L and XLFS.L have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XUFB.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XUFB.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.14% for XLFS.L.

XUFB.L tracks MSCI World/Financials NR USD, while XLFS.L tracks S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Financials Index. They also come from different issuers: DWS and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for XUFB.L and 0.14% for XLFS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XUFB.L and XLFS.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