PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
3070.HK vs. ETLQ.DE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

3070.HK vs. ETLQ.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a HK$10,000 investment in Ping An of China CSI HK Dividend ETF (3070.HK) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (ETLQ.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

3070.HK is traded in HKD, while ETLQ.DE is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the ETLQ.DE values have been converted to HKD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with 3070.HK having a 10.14% return and ETLQ.DE slightly higher at 10.35%.


3070.HK

1D
-0.81%
1M
-3.89%
YTD
10.14%
6M
6.51%
1Y
23.06%
3Y*
23.52%
5Y*
15.13%
10Y*
12.99%

ETLQ.DE

1D
0.08%
1M
2.66%
YTD
10.35%
6M
11.38%
1Y
25.47%
3Y*
20.91%
5Y*
12.27%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

3070.HK vs. ETLQ.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
3070.HK
Ping An of China CSI HK Dividend ETF
10.14%25.91%36.16%12.21%3.61%4.52%-12.13%4.16%
ETLQ.DE
L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF
10.35%22.30%18.25%24.64%-18.29%22.90%15.42%21.62%

Correlation

The correlation between 3070.HK and ETLQ.DE is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

0.01

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

0.14

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

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2019

0.19

The correlation between 3070.HK and ETLQ.DE shifts across timeframes, from 0.01 (1 year) to 0.19 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

3070.HK vs. ETLQ.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

3070.HK
3070.HK Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
3070.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3070.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
3070.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
3070.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
3070.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank

ETLQ.DE
ETLQ.DE Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
ETLQ.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ETLQ.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
ETLQ.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
ETLQ.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
ETLQ.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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.

3070.HK vs. ETLQ.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ping An of China CSI HK Dividend ETF (3070.HK) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (ETLQ.DE). 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.


3070.HKETLQ.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.53

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.97

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.38

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.60

3.10

-0.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.32

13.52

-6.20

3070.HK vs. ETLQ.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 3070.HK Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is comparable to the ETLQ.DE Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 3070.HK and ETLQ.DE, 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


3070.HKETLQ.DEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.65

2.18

-0.53

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.81

0.79

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.74

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.66

0.89

-0.22

Drawdowns

3070.HK vs. ETLQ.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 3070.HK drawdown since its inception was -33.58%, roughly equal to the maximum ETLQ.DE drawdown of -33.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3070.HK and ETLQ.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


3070.HKETLQ.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.58%

-33.99%

+0.41%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.26%

-8.31%

-0.95%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.25%

-18.04%

+4.79%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.26%

-25.38%

+2.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.30%

-0.55%

-4.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.21%

-4.86%

-5.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.26%

1.91%

+1.35%

Volatility

3070.HK vs. ETLQ.DE - Volatility Comparison

Ping An of China CSI HK Dividend ETF (3070.HK) has a higher volatility of 3.86% compared to L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (ETLQ.DE) at 3.07%. This indicates that 3070.HK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ETLQ.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


3070.HKETLQ.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.86%

3.07%

+0.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.39%

8.80%

+1.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.60%

11.79%

+2.81%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.28%

15.42%

+3.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.53%

16.85%

+3.68%

3070.HK vs. ETLQ.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

3070.HK has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is higher than ETLQ.DE's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

3070.HK vs. ETLQ.DE - Dividend Comparison

3070.HK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.68%, while ETLQ.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
3070.HK
Ping An of China CSI HK Dividend ETF
4.68%4.79%3.93%6.93%8.04%6.05%4.20%4.33%4.86%2.45%6.13%3.33%
ETLQ.DE
L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


3070.HK and ETLQ.DE have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ETLQ.DE is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ETLQ.DE is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for 3070.HK.

3070.HK is categorized as China Equities, while ETLQ.DE is Global Equities. 3070.HK tracks CSI Hong Kong Dividend Index, while ETLQ.DE tracks Solactive Core Developed Markets Large & Mid Cap. They also come from different issuers: Ping An of China Trust and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for 3070.HK and 0.10% for ETLQ.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 3070.HK and ETLQ.DE

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