XZMD.L vs. XNAS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XZMD.L (Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D) and XNAS.L (Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XZMD.L is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 TR USD, while XNAS.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XZMD.L returned 22.70%/yr vs 28.10%/yr for XNAS.L. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XZMD.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XNAS.L.

Performance

XZMD.L vs. XNAS.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 Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XZMD.L achieves a 8.86% return, which is significantly lower than XNAS.L's 19.67% return.

XZMD.L

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

XNAS.L

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 8.53%
• YTD: 19.67%
• 6M: 19.16%
• 1Y: 40.41%
• 3Y*: 28.10%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XZMD.L Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D	8.86%	15.91%	26.20%	29.82%	5.97%
XNAS.L Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF	19.67%	19.83%	26.60%	56.41%	-1.82%

Correlation

The correlation between XZMD.L and XNAS.L is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2022	0.49

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

Sectors	XZMD.L	XNAS.L
Technology	37.2%	53.7%
Communication Services	15.0%	15.8%
Financial Services	12.7%	0.2%
Healthcare	10.7%	4.2%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	12.2%
Industrials	8.7%	3.1%
Real Estate	2.7%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.6%	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	1.3%	7.7%
Utilities	0.3%	1.4%
Energy	0.1%	0.6%

Return for Risk

XZMD.L vs. XNAS.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: 94
XZMD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
XZMD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
XZMD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 93
XZMD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
XZMD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

XZMD.L vs. XNAS.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 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.

	XZMD.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.70	2.54	+1.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.20	3.51	+1.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.64	1.44	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.91	3.67	+3.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	25.04	13.19	+11.85
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current XZMD.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.70, which is higher than the XNAS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XZMD.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

	XZMD.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.70	2.54	+1.16
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.45	1.69	-0.24

Drawdowns

XZMD.L vs. XNAS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XZMD.L drawdown since its inception was -20.62%, smaller than the maximum XNAS.L drawdown of -22.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XZMD.L and XNAS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XZMD.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.62%	-22.92%	+2.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.61%	-10.91%	-0.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.62%	-22.92%	+2.30%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.33%	-0.76%	+0.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.83%	-3.03%	-1.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.37%	3.05%	+2.32%

Volatility

XZMD.L vs. XNAS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D (XZMD.L) is 3.53%, while Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (XNAS.L) has a volatility of 4.96%. This indicates that XZMD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XNAS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XZMD.L	XNAS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.53%	4.96%	-1.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.72%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.75%	15.78%	+5.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.27%	19.39%	+4.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.27%	19.39%	+4.88%

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

XZMD.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than XNAS.L's 0.20% 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

XZMD.L vs. XNAS.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
XNAS.L Xtrackers NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF	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

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

XZMD.L and XNAS.L have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

On fees, XZMD.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XZMD.L or XNAS.L?

XZMD.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XNAS.L.

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

XZMD.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while XNAS.L is Nasdaq-100. XZMD.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while XNAS.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for XZMD.L and 0.20% for XNAS.L.