EMUS.L vs. HTWG.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

EMUS.L (L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and HTWG.L (L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMUS.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index, while HTWG.L is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMUS.L returned 1.05%/yr vs -0.18%/yr for HTWG.L. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMUS.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for HTWG.L.

Performance

EMUS.L vs. HTWG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUS.L) and L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF (HTWG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

EMUS.L is traded in USD, while HTWG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the HTWG.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMUS.L achieves a -1.57% return, which is significantly lower than HTWG.L's 31.05% return.

EMUS.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.23%
• 6M: -1.57%
• YTD: -1.57%
• 1Y: 2.64%
• 3Y*: 5.25%
• 5Y*: 1.05%
• 10Y*: —

HTWG.L

• 1D: -1.46%
• 1M: -9.22%
• 6M: 18.72%
• YTD: 31.05%
• 1Y: 61.73%
• 3Y*: 14.62%
• 5Y*: -0.18%
• 10Y*: —

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

EMUS.L vs. HTWG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EMUS.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	-1.57%	8.01%	5.52%	7.02%	-11.63%	-0.83%
HTWG.L L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF	31.05%	40.54%	-8.27%	-3.67%	-37.07%	-31.56%

Correlation

The correlation between EMUS.L and HTWG.L is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.31
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 10, 2021	0.31

Return for Risk

EMUS.L vs. HTWG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMUS.L

EMUS.L Risk / Return Rank: 19
EMUS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
EMUS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
EMUS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 23
EMUS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
EMUS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 18

HTWG.L

HTWG.L Risk / Return Rank: 68
HTWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
HTWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
HTWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
HTWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
HTWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

EMUS.L vs. HTWG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUS.L) and L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF (HTWG.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.

	EMUS.L	HTWG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.58	1.92	-1.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.81	2.54	-1.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.31	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.57	2.96	-2.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.52	8.25	-6.73

EMUS.L vs. HTWG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMUS.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.58, which is lower than the HTWG.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMUS.L and HTWG.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

EMUS.L vs. HTWG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMUS.L drawdown since its inception was -19.58%, smaller than the maximum HTWG.L drawdown of -67.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMUS.L and HTWG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMUS.L	HTWG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.58%	-67.81%	+48.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.59%	-20.72%	+16.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.59%	-32.66%	+28.07%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.58%	-59.41%	+39.83%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.90%	-29.91%	+28.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.63%	-47.93%	+42.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.73%	7.46%	-5.73%

Volatility

EMUS.L vs. HTWG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUS.L) is 0.82%, while L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF (HTWG.L) has a volatility of 11.15%. This indicates that EMUS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HTWG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMUS.L	HTWG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.82%	11.15%	-10.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.14%	22.82%	-18.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.56%	31.93%	-27.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.30%	29.04%	-23.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.30%	29.09%	-23.79%

EMUS.L vs. HTWG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMUS.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than HTWG.L's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMUS.L vs. HTWG.L - Dividend Comparison

EMUS.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.81%, while HTWG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EMUS.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	2.81%	5.39%	4.96%	4.62%	3.79%	1.17%
HTWG.L L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMUS.L and HTWG.L in my portfolio?

EMUS.L and HTWG.L have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EMUS.L or HTWG.L?

On fees, EMUS.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMUS.L or HTWG.L?

EMUS.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for HTWG.L.

What is the main difference between EMUS.L and HTWG.L?

EMUS.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while HTWG.L is Alternative Energy Equities. EMUS.L tracks J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index, while HTWG.L tracks Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for EMUS.L and 0.49% for HTWG.L.