ESIE.L vs. RENG.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ESIE.L (iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)) and RENG.L (L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF) are both Energy Equities funds - ESIE.L tracks the MSCI World/Energy NR USD while RENG.L tracks the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ESIE.L returned 20.09%/yr vs 9.68%/yr for RENG.L. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ESIE.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for RENG.L.

Performance

ESIE.L vs. RENG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIE.L) and L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

ESIE.L is traded in GBP, while RENG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the RENG.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESIE.L achieves a 35.58% return, which is significantly lower than RENG.L's 44.46% return.

ESIE.L

• 1D: 2.01%
• 1M: -0.45%
• YTD: 35.58%
• 6M: 31.87%
• 1Y: 58.97%
• 3Y*: 18.27%
• 5Y*: 20.09%
• 10Y*: —

RENG.L

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: 8.19%
• YTD: 44.46%
• 6M: 43.89%
• 1Y: 89.37%
• 3Y*: 16.55%
• 5Y*: 9.68%
• 10Y*: —

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

ESIE.L vs. RENG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ESIE.L iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)	35.58%	20.13%	-9.70%	6.04%	44.68%	26.96%	1.47%
RENG.L L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF	44.46%	40.21%	-12.86%	-13.13%	2.03%	-6.20%	14.76%

Correlation

The correlation between ESIE.L and RENG.L is -0.03, 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	-0.03
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.20
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 24, 2020	0.25

The correlation between ESIE.L and RENG.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (1 year) to 0.27 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ESIE.L vs. RENG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ESIE.L	RENG.L
Energy	99.1%	1.6%
Communication Services	0.9%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	3.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	49.4%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	23.8%
Utilities	-	22.3%

Return for Risk

ESIE.L vs. RENG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESIE.L

ESIE.L Risk / Return Rank: 77
ESIE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
ESIE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
ESIE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 75
ESIE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
ESIE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 77

RENG.L

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

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.

ESIE.L vs. RENG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIE.L) and L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENG.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.

	ESIE.L	RENG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.56	4.01	-1.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	4.67	-1.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.63	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.84	10.06	-5.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.81	35.59	-20.78
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ESIE.L vs. RENG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESIE.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is lower than the RENG.L Sharpe Ratio of 4.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESIE.L and RENG.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

	ESIE.L	RENG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.56	4.01	-1.44
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83	0.45	+0.38
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.87	0.48	+0.39

Drawdowns

ESIE.L vs. RENG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESIE.L drawdown since its inception was -27.35%, smaller than the maximum RENG.L drawdown of -45.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESIE.L and RENG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ESIE.L	RENG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.35%	-45.48%	+18.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.13%	-8.84%	-3.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.35%	-33.95%	+6.60%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.35%	-40.27%	+12.92%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.04%	-1.79%	-4.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.24%	-20.65%	+12.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.97%	2.50%	+1.47%

Volatility

ESIE.L vs. RENG.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Europe Energy Sector UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) (ESIE.L) and L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENG.L) have volatilities of 8.04% and 8.17%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ESIE.L	RENG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.04%	8.17%	-0.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.14%	15.75%	+3.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.89%	22.23%	+0.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.32%	21.71%	+2.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.59%	22.30%	+2.29%

ESIE.L vs. RENG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESIE.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than RENG.L's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

ESIE.L vs. RENG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ESIE.L nor RENG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ESIE.L and RENG.L in my portfolio?

ESIE.L and RENG.L have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ESIE.L or RENG.L?

On fees, ESIE.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ESIE.L or RENG.L?

ESIE.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for RENG.L.

What is the main difference between ESIE.L and RENG.L?

ESIE.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while RENG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ESIE.L and 0.49% for RENG.L.