ENGW.L vs. RNRU.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ENGW.L (SPDR MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF) and RNRU.L (Global X Renewable Energy Producers UCITS ETF USD Accumulating) are both Energy Equities funds - ENGW.L tracks the MSCI World/Energy NR USD while RNRU.L tracks the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ENGW.L returned 16.05%/yr vs 3.62%/yr for RNRU.L. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ENGW.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for RNRU.L.

Performance

ENGW.L vs. RNRU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF (ENGW.L) and Global X Renewable Energy Producers UCITS ETF USD Accumulating (RNRU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ENGW.L achieves a 31.48% return, which is significantly higher than RNRU.L's 21.49% return.

ENGW.L

• 1D: 2.24%
• 1M: 0.93%
• YTD: 31.48%
• 6M: 29.41%
• 1Y: 47.44%
• 3Y*: 16.05%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RNRU.L

• 1D: -1.75%
• 1M: 1.88%
• YTD: 21.49%
• 6M: 20.44%
• 1Y: 54.55%
• 3Y*: 3.62%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ENGW.L vs. RNRU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
ENGW.L SPDR MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF	31.48%	7.20%	3.55%	-2.06%	20.65%
RNRU.L Global X Renewable Energy Producers UCITS ETF USD Accumulating	21.49%	24.83%	-21.90%	-19.50%	-8.26%

Correlation

The correlation between ENGW.L and RNRU.L is -0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.06
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2022	0.21

The correlation between ENGW.L and RNRU.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.06 (1 year) to 0.21 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ENGW.L vs. RNRU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ENGW.L

ENGW.L Risk / Return Rank: 63
ENGW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
ENGW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
ENGW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
ENGW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
ENGW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 61

RNRU.L

RNRU.L Risk / Return Rank: 93
RNRU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
RNRU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
RNRU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 89
RNRU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
RNRU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

ENGW.L vs. RNRU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF (ENGW.L) and Global X Renewable Energy Producers UCITS ETF USD Accumulating (RNRU.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.

	ENGW.L	RNRU.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.23	3.46	-1.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.69	4.57	-1.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.57	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.24	9.76	-6.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.79	32.10	-21.31
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ENGW.L vs. RNRU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ENGW.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is lower than the RNRU.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ENGW.L and RNRU.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ENGW.L	RNRU.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.23	3.46	-1.23
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.61	-0.10	+0.71

Drawdowns

ENGW.L vs. RNRU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ENGW.L drawdown since its inception was -21.65%, smaller than the maximum RNRU.L drawdown of -53.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ENGW.L and RNRU.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ENGW.L	RNRU.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.65%	-53.53%	+31.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.56%	-5.56%	-9.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.40%	-37.25%	+15.85%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.08%	-18.84%	+11.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.76%	-29.05%	+20.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.38%	1.69%	+2.69%

Volatility

ENGW.L vs. RNRU.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI World Energy UCITS ETF (ENGW.L) has a higher volatility of 8.13% compared to Global X Renewable Energy Producers UCITS ETF USD Accumulating (RNRU.L) at 5.34%. This indicates that ENGW.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RNRU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ENGW.L	RNRU.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.13%	5.34%	+2.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.03%	11.78%	+6.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.27%	15.72%	+5.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.80%	18.33%	+4.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.80%	18.33%	+4.47%

ENGW.L vs. RNRU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ENGW.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than RNRU.L's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

ENGW.L vs. RNRU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ENGW.L nor RNRU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ENGW.L and RNRU.L in my portfolio?

ENGW.L and RNRU.L have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ENGW.L or RNRU.L?

On fees, ENGW.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ENGW.L or RNRU.L?

ENGW.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for RNRU.L.

What is the main difference between ENGW.L and RNRU.L?

ENGW.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while RNRU.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for ENGW.L and 0.50% for RNRU.L.