AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

AUCO.L (L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF) and HTWO.L (L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - AUCO.L is a Gold fund tracking the STOXX Global Gold Miners Index, while HTWO.L is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AUCO.L returned 21.59%/yr vs -1.42%/yr for HTWO.L. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AUCO.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for HTWO.L.

Performance

AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) and L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (HTWO.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUCO.L achieves a -18.06% return, which is significantly lower than HTWO.L's 25.57% return.

AUCO.L

• 1D: -0.66%
• 1M: -11.61%
• 6M: -28.46%
• YTD: -18.06%
• 1Y: 41.77%
• 3Y*: 40.86%
• 5Y*: 21.59%
• 10Y*: 11.99%
• ALL TIME*: 7.38%

HTWO.L

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: -14.14%
• 6M: 11.42%
• YTD: 25.57%
• 1Y: 52.07%
• 3Y*: 12.74%
• 5Y*: -1.42%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -7.37%

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

AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
AUCO.L L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF	-18.06%	181.83%	17.96%	15.02%	-14.30%	-7.05%
HTWO.L L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	25.57%	40.50%	-8.00%	-3.49%	-37.13%	-33.03%

Correlation

The correlation between AUCO.L and HTWO.L is 0.50, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.40
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 10, 2021	0.38

The correlation between AUCO.L and HTWO.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (all time) to 0.50 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AUCO.L	HTWO.L
Basic Materials	100.0%	26.5%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	52.7%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	10.8%

Return for Risk

AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AUCO.L

AUCO.L Risk / Return Rank: 30
AUCO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
AUCO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
AUCO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 31
AUCO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
AUCO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 26

HTWO.L

HTWO.L Risk / Return Rank: 60
HTWO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
HTWO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
HTWO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 59
HTWO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
HTWO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) and L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (HTWO.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AUCO.L	HTWO.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.85	1.60	-0.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.36	2.23	-0.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.27	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.07	2.23	-1.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.50	6.59	-4.09

AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUCO.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.85, which is lower than the HTWO.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUCO.L and HTWO.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.

Drawdowns

AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUCO.L drawdown since its inception was -78.30%, which is greater than HTWO.L's maximum drawdown of -68.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUCO.L and HTWO.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	AUCO.L	HTWO.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.30%	-68.35%	-9.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-38.89%	-23.23%	-15.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-38.89%	-31.61%	-7.28%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-48.62%	-59.35%	+10.73%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-54.47%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-38.89%	-34.05%	-4.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-40.73%	-48.82%	+8.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.65%	7.88%	+8.77%

Volatility

AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) has a higher volatility of 13.52% compared to L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (HTWO.L) at 10.31%. This indicates that AUCO.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HTWO.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AUCO.L	HTWO.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.52%	10.31%	+3.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.27%	23.62%	+15.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	49.01%	32.50%	+16.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	38.97%	29.25%	+9.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.75%	29.36%	+6.39%

AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUCO.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than HTWO.L's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

AUCO.L vs. HTWO.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AUCO.L nor HTWO.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AUCO.L and HTWO.L in my portfolio?

AUCO.L and HTWO.L have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AUCO.L or HTWO.L?

On fees, HTWO.L is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AUCO.L or HTWO.L?

HTWO.L is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for AUCO.L.

What is the main difference between AUCO.L and HTWO.L?

AUCO.L is categorized as Gold, while HTWO.L is Alternative Energy Equities. AUCO.L tracks STOXX Global Gold Miners Index, while HTWO.L tracks Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for AUCO.L and 0.49% for HTWO.L.