PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AIGS.L vs. HOGS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AIGS.L vs. HOGS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree Softs (AIGS.L) and WisdomTree Lean Hogs (HOGS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIGS.L achieves a -12.24% return, which is significantly lower than HOGS.L's -7.82% return. Over the past 10 years, AIGS.L has outperformed HOGS.L with an annualized return of 2.26%, while HOGS.L has yielded a comparatively lower -6.22% annualized return.


AIGS.L

1D
-2.05%
1M
-9.93%
YTD
-12.24%
6M
-15.11%
1Y
-13.13%
3Y*
4.76%
5Y*
9.62%
10Y*
2.26%

HOGS.L

1D
-1.08%
1M
-3.55%
YTD
-7.82%
6M
-3.60%
1Y
-6.57%
3Y*
9.10%
5Y*
-2.16%
10Y*
-6.22%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AIGS.L vs. HOGS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
AIGS.L
WisdomTree Softs
-12.24%2.96%25.45%20.14%-4.35%43.50%-0.54%3.02%-21.88%-16.48%
HOGS.L
WisdomTree Lean Hogs
-7.82%6.22%22.20%-22.50%9.28%31.95%-34.91%-21.42%-9.85%3.39%

Correlation

The correlation between AIGS.L and HOGS.L is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.12

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

0.09

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

0.09

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 19, 2007

0.10

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

AIGS.L vs. HOGS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AIGS.L
AIGS.L Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
AIGS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AIGS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
AIGS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
AIGS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
AIGS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 44
Martin Ratio Rank

HOGS.L
HOGS.L Risk / Return Rank: 66
Overall Rank
HOGS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HOGS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
HOGS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
HOGS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
HOGS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 55
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.

AIGS.L vs. HOGS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Softs (AIGS.L) and WisdomTree Lean Hogs (HOGS.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.


AIGS.LHOGS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.91

0.96

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.55

-0.40

-0.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.07

-0.82

-0.25

AIGS.L vs. HOGS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIGS.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.62, which is lower than the HOGS.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIGS.L and HOGS.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


AIGS.LHOGS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.62

-0.35

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

-0.10

+0.55

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.11

-0.23

+0.35

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.01

-0.32

+0.31

Drawdowns

AIGS.L vs. HOGS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIGS.L drawdown since its inception was -79.63%, smaller than the maximum HOGS.L drawdown of -93.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIGS.L and HOGS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AIGS.LHOGS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-79.63%

-93.79%

+14.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-23.61%

-16.24%

-7.37%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.19%

-19.71%

-7.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.19%

-43.15%

+15.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-55.98%

-73.76%

+17.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-50.04%

-87.83%

+37.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-50.34%

-74.70%

+24.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

12.23%

8.02%

+4.21%

Volatility

AIGS.L vs. HOGS.L - Volatility Comparison

WisdomTree Softs (AIGS.L) has a higher volatility of 7.29% compared to WisdomTree Lean Hogs (HOGS.L) at 5.17%. This indicates that AIGS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HOGS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AIGS.LHOGS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.29%

5.17%

+2.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.09%

12.71%

+2.38%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.18%

18.58%

+2.60%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.25%

31.97%

-10.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.91%

38.40%

-18.49%

AIGS.L vs. HOGS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AIGS.L and HOGS.L have an expense ratio of 0.49%.


Dividends

AIGS.L vs. HOGS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AIGS.L nor HOGS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


AIGS.L and HOGS.L have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.49% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

AIGS.L and HOGS.L have the same expense ratio: 0.49% per year.

AIGS.L tracks Bloomberg Softs, while HOGS.L tracks Bloomberg Lean Hogs.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AIGS.L and HOGS.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