PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D (XZMD.L) and BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS USD Acc (BBUS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XZMD.L achieves a 8.86% return, which is significantly lower than BBUS.L's 10.13% return.


XZMD.L

1D
0.76%
1M
4.34%
YTD
8.86%
6M
9.17%
1Y
25.73%
3Y*
22.70%
5Y*
10Y*

BBUS.L

1D
0.07%
1M
4.56%
YTD
10.13%
6M
10.79%
1Y
27.37%
3Y*
22.24%
5Y*
13.29%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
XZMD.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D
8.86%15.91%26.20%29.82%-9.60%
BBUS.L
BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS USD Acc
10.13%17.54%24.99%27.63%-9.02%

Correlation

The correlation between XZMD.L and BBUS.L is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.48

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

0.46

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 3, 2022

0.58

The correlation between XZMD.L and BBUS.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (3 years) to 0.58 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XZMD.L
BBUS.L

Technology

37.2%
39.7%

Communication Services

15.0%
11.5%

Financial Services

12.7%
10.9%

Healthcare

10.7%
8.0%

Consumer Cyclical

9.8%
9.7%

Industrials

8.7%
7.5%

Real Estate

2.7%
1.3%

Basic Materials

1.6%
1.4%

Consumer Defensive

1.3%
4.1%

Utilities

0.3%
2.1%

Energy

0.1%
3.2%

Technology

XZMD.L
37.2%
BBUS.L
39.7%

Communication Services

XZMD.L
15.0%
BBUS.L
11.5%

Financial Services

XZMD.L
12.7%
BBUS.L
10.9%

Healthcare

XZMD.L
10.7%
BBUS.L
8.0%

Consumer Cyclical

XZMD.L
9.8%
BBUS.L
9.7%

Industrials

XZMD.L
8.7%
BBUS.L
7.5%

Real Estate

XZMD.L
2.7%
BBUS.L
1.3%

Basic Materials

XZMD.L
1.6%
BBUS.L
1.4%

Consumer Defensive

XZMD.L
1.3%
BBUS.L
4.1%

Utilities

XZMD.L
0.3%
BBUS.L
2.1%

Energy

XZMD.L
0.1%
BBUS.L
3.2%

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

XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XZMD.L
XZMD.L Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
XZMD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XZMD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
XZMD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
XZMD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
XZMD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank

BBUS.L
BBUS.L Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
BBUS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BBUS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
BBUS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
BBUS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
BBUS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D (XZMD.L) and BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS USD Acc (BBUS.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.


XZMD.LBBUS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.64

1.43

+0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.91

3.16

+3.75

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

25.04

13.61

+11.43

XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XZMD.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.70, which is higher than the BBUS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XZMD.L and BBUS.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


XZMD.LBBUS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.70

2.35

+1.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.45

0.89

+0.56

Drawdowns

XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XZMD.L drawdown since its inception was -20.62%, smaller than the maximum BBUS.L drawdown of -34.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XZMD.L and BBUS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XZMD.LBBUS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.62%

-34.26%

+13.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.61%

-8.62%

-2.99%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.62%

-19.35%

-1.27%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.33%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.33%

-0.46%

+0.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.83%

-5.40%

+0.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.37%

2.01%

+3.36%

Volatility

XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D (XZMD.L) has a higher volatility of 3.53% compared to BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS USD Acc (BBUS.L) at 3.23%. This indicates that XZMD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BBUS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XZMD.LBBUS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.53%

3.23%

+0.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.75%

11.59%

+10.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.27%

16.10%

+8.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.27%

17.86%

+6.41%

XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XZMD.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than BBUS.L's 0.04% 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

XZMD.L vs. BBUS.L - Dividend Comparison

XZMD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.68%, while BBUS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
BBUS.L
BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS USD Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XZMD.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D
0.68%0.79%0.95%0.95%0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions


XZMD.L and BBUS.L have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, BBUS.L is cheaper at 0.04% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

BBUS.L is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for XZMD.L.

Both ETFs track Russell 1000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for XZMD.L and 0.04% for BBUS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XZMD.L and BBUS.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