PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc) (BBSU.L) and L&G US Equity UCITS ETF (LGUG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with BBSU.L having a 10.31% return and LGUG.L slightly higher at 10.49%.


BBSU.L

1D
0.07%
1M
5.58%
YTD
10.31%
6M
10.11%
1Y
28.62%
3Y*
19.09%
5Y*
14.50%
10Y*

LGUG.L

1D
-0.07%
1M
5.71%
YTD
10.49%
6M
10.18%
1Y
28.95%
3Y*
19.37%
5Y*
14.90%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
BBSU.L
JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc)
10.31%9.39%27.19%20.71%-10.46%29.25%16.07%11.91%
LGUG.L
L&G US Equity UCITS ETF
10.49%9.75%27.44%21.53%-10.98%29.52%15.44%12.83%

Correlation

The correlation between BBSU.L and LGUG.L is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.98

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

0.98

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

0.97

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2019

0.85

The correlation between BBSU.L and LGUG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.85 (all time) to 0.98 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BBSU.L
LGUG.L

Technology

35.4%
38.3%

Financial Services

11.8%
11.1%

Communication Services

11.5%
11.2%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
10.1%

Healthcare

8.6%
8.6%

Industrials

8.4%
7.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.8%
4.7%

Energy

3.6%
3.3%

Utilities

2.3%
2.0%

Real Estate

1.8%
1.6%

Basic Materials

1.7%
1.6%

Technology

BBSU.L
35.4%
LGUG.L
38.3%

Financial Services

BBSU.L
11.8%
LGUG.L
11.1%

Communication Services

BBSU.L
11.5%
LGUG.L
11.2%

Consumer Cyclical

BBSU.L
10.1%
LGUG.L
10.1%

Healthcare

BBSU.L
8.6%
LGUG.L
8.6%

Industrials

BBSU.L
8.4%
LGUG.L
7.6%

Consumer Defensive

BBSU.L
4.8%
LGUG.L
4.7%

Energy

BBSU.L
3.6%
LGUG.L
3.3%

Utilities

BBSU.L
2.3%
LGUG.L
2.0%

Real Estate

BBSU.L
1.8%
LGUG.L
1.6%

Basic Materials

BBSU.L
1.7%
LGUG.L
1.6%

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

BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

BBSU.L
BBSU.L Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
BBSU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BBSU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
BBSU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
BBSU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
BBSU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

LGUG.L
LGUG.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
LGUG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LGUG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
LGUG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
LGUG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
LGUG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
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.

BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc) (BBSU.L) and L&G US Equity UCITS ETF (LGUG.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.


BBSU.LLGUG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.50

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.65

3.60

+0.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.74

12.19

+0.55

BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BBSU.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is comparable to the LGUG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BBSU.L and LGUG.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


BBSU.LLGUG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.70

2.66

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.00

1.03

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.96

1.20

-0.24

Drawdowns

BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BBSU.L drawdown since its inception was -25.80%, roughly equal to the maximum LGUG.L drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BBSU.L and LGUG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BBSU.LLGUG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.80%

-24.75%

-1.05%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.80%

-8.01%

+0.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.42%

-21.49%

+0.07%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.42%

-21.49%

+0.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.17%

-0.30%

+0.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.72%

-3.78%

+0.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.24%

2.37%

-0.13%

Volatility

BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc) (BBSU.L) is 2.64%, while L&G US Equity UCITS ETF (LGUG.L) has a volatility of 2.89%. This indicates that BBSU.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LGUG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BBSU.LLGUG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.64%

2.89%

-0.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.21%

7.56%

-0.35%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.54%

10.83%

-0.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.45%

14.84%

-0.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.10%

17.37%

-1.27%

BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BBSU.L and LGUG.L have an expense ratio of 0.05%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

BBSU.L vs. LGUG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither BBSU.L nor LGUG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.98, BBSU.L and LGUG.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Both ETFs have the same 0.05% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

BBSU.L and LGUG.L have the same expense ratio: 0.05% per year.

Both ETFs track Russell 1000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and Legal & General.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BBSU.L and LGUG.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