ECOG.L vs. QWTM.L
ECOG.L (Legal & General UCITS ETF plc - L&G Ecommerce Logistics UCITS ETF) and QWTM.L (WisdomTree Quantum Computing UCITS ETF - USD Acc) are both Technology Equities funds - ECOG.L tracks the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD while QWTM.L tracks the WisdomTree Classiq Quantum Computing UCITS Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ECOG.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for QWTM.L.
Performance
ECOG.L vs. QWTM.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ECOG.L achieves a -1.05% return, which is significantly lower than QWTM.L's 54.42% return.
ECOG.L
- 1D
- -1.41%
- 1M
- 2.40%
- YTD
- -1.05%
- 6M
- 0.38%
- 1Y
- 7.32%
- 3Y*
- 5.55%
- 5Y*
- 2.25%
- 10Y*
- —
QWTM.L
- 1D
- -2.39%
- 1M
- 27.41%
- YTD
- 54.42%
- 6M
- 52.73%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ECOG.L vs. QWTM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ECOG.L Legal & General UCITS ETF plc - L&G Ecommerce Logistics UCITS ETF | -1.05% | 3.50% |
QWTM.L WisdomTree Quantum Computing UCITS ETF - USD Acc | 54.42% | 19.86% |
Correlation
The correlation between ECOG.L and QWTM.L is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 4, 2025 | 0.45 |
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
ECOG.L vs. QWTM.L — Risk / Return Rank
ECOG.L
QWTM.L
ECOG.L vs. QWTM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Legal & General UCITS ETF plc - L&G Ecommerce Logistics UCITS ETF (ECOG.L) and WisdomTree Quantum Computing UCITS ETF - USD Acc (QWTM.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.
| ECOG.L | QWTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.10 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.57 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.54 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ECOG.L | QWTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.51 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.14 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 3.28 | -2.81 |
Drawdowns
ECOG.L vs. QWTM.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ECOG.L drawdown since its inception was -26.12%, which is greater than QWTM.L's maximum drawdown of -23.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECOG.L and QWTM.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ECOG.L | QWTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.12% | -23.74% | -2.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.80% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.66% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.12% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.62% | -2.39% | -2.23% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.65% | -10.24% | +2.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.73% | — | — |
Volatility
ECOG.L vs. QWTM.L - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ECOG.L | QWTM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.15% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.71% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.40% | 39.20% | -24.80% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.55% | 39.20% | -22.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.05% | 39.20% | -22.15% |
ECOG.L vs. QWTM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ECOG.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than QWTM.L's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
ECOG.L vs. QWTM.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither ECOG.L nor QWTM.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
ECOG.L and QWTM.L have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ECOG.L is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ECOG.L is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for QWTM.L.
ECOG.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD, while QWTM.L tracks WisdomTree Classiq Quantum Computing UCITS Index. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and WisdomTree. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ECOG.L and 0.50% for QWTM.L.
Find the right allocation for ECOG.L and QWTM.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