XWFS.L vs. XLFS.L
XWFS.L (Xtrackers MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF 1C) and XLFS.L (Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc) are both Financials Equities funds - XWFS.L tracks the MSCI World/Financials NR USD while XLFS.L tracks the S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Financials Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XWFS.L returned 20.16%/yr vs 14.31%/yr for XLFS.L. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XWFS.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLFS.L.
Performance
XWFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
XWFS.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, XWFS.L achieves a -1.42% return, which is significantly higher than XLFS.L's -7.55% return.
XWFS.L
- 1D
- -0.98%
- 1M
- -0.19%
- YTD
- -1.42%
- 6M
- 2.61%
- 1Y
- 13.19%
- 3Y*
- 20.16%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XLFS.L
- 1D
- -1.40%
- 1M
- -2.45%
- YTD
- -7.55%
- 6M
- -4.89%
- 1Y
- 1.32%
- 3Y*
- 14.31%
- 5Y*
- 8.41%
- 10Y*
- 12.88%
XWFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XWFS.L Xtrackers MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF 1C | -1.42% | 20.20% | 29.08% | 10.02% | -0.66% |
XLFS.L Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc | -7.55% | 6.80% | 32.42% | 6.51% | -3.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between XWFS.L and XLFS.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 | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2022 | 0.85 |
The correlation between XWFS.L and XLFS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.88 - 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
XWFS.L vs. XLFS.L — Risk / Return Rank
XWFS.L
XLFS.L
XWFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF 1C (XWFS.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.
| XWFS.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.03 | +0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.36 | 0.10 | +1.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.37 | 0.24 | +4.13 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XWFS.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.06 | 0.09 | +0.97 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.46 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.62 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.82 | 0.60 | +0.22 |
Drawdowns
XWFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XWFS.L drawdown since its inception was -16.47%, smaller than the maximum XLFS.L drawdown of -35.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XWFS.L and XLFS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XWFS.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.47% | -35.78% | +19.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.64% | -13.13% | +3.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.47% | -18.78% | +2.31% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -18.78% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.78% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.91% | -9.44% | +6.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.11% | -6.60% | +2.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.01% | 5.44% | -2.43% |
Volatility
XWFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI World Financials UCITS ETF 1C (XWFS.L) is 2.90%, while Invesco Financials S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLFS.L) has a volatility of 3.70%. This indicates that XWFS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLFS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XWFS.L | XLFS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.90% | 3.70% | -0.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.62% | 10.99% | -1.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.43% | 14.59% | -2.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.02% | 18.49% | -2.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.02% | 20.79% | -4.77% |
XWFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XWFS.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XLFS.L's 0.14% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
XWFS.L vs. XLFS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XWFS.L nor XLFS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XWFS.L and XLFS.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, XLFS.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLFS.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XWFS.L.
XWFS.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: Xtrackers and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XWFS.L and 0.14% for XLFS.L.
Find the right allocation for XWFS.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