PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESJS.L) and L&G Japan Equity UCITS ETF (LGJG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ESJS.L achieves a 14.30% return, which is significantly higher than LGJG.L's 12.23% return.


ESJS.L

1D
-0.97%
1M
-3.72%
6M
7.59%
YTD
14.30%
1Y
32.76%
3Y*
16.70%
5Y*
9.73%
10Y*

LGJG.L

1D
-2.05%
1M
-4.76%
6M
5.91%
YTD
12.23%
1Y
29.22%
3Y*
15.27%
5Y*
9.54%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
ESJS.L
Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc
14.30%18.47%9.64%12.97%-7.90%-27.12%
LGJG.L
L&G Japan Equity UCITS ETF
12.23%17.46%10.01%13.64%-6.84%1.03%

Correlation

The correlation between ESJS.L and LGJG.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

0.97

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

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 8, 2021

0.98

The correlation between ESJS.L and LGJG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ESJS.L
LGJG.L

Technology

25.5%
21.7%

Industrials

23.2%
22.5%

Financial Services

18.6%
18.0%

Consumer Cyclical

10.2%
12.2%

Communication Services

9.1%
8.3%

Healthcare

6.0%
5.5%

Basic Materials

2.5%
3.6%

Consumer Defensive

2.0%
3.9%

Real Estate

1.8%
2.7%

Energy

0.7%
0.6%

Utilities

0.4%
1.0%

Technology

ESJS.L
25.5%
LGJG.L
21.7%

Industrials

ESJS.L
23.2%
LGJG.L
22.5%

Financial Services

ESJS.L
18.6%
LGJG.L
18.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ESJS.L
10.2%
LGJG.L
12.2%

Communication Services

ESJS.L
9.1%
LGJG.L
8.3%

Healthcare

ESJS.L
6.0%
LGJG.L
5.5%

Basic Materials

ESJS.L
2.5%
LGJG.L
3.6%

Consumer Defensive

ESJS.L
2.0%
LGJG.L
3.9%

Real Estate

ESJS.L
1.8%
LGJG.L
2.7%

Energy

ESJS.L
0.7%
LGJG.L
0.6%

Utilities

ESJS.L
0.4%
LGJG.L
1.0%

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

ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESJS.L
ESJS.L Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
ESJS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESJS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESJS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
ESJS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESJS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

LGJG.L
LGJG.L Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
LGJG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LGJG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
LGJG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
LGJG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
LGJG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
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.

ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESJS.L) and L&G Japan Equity UCITS ETF (LGJG.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.


ESJS.LLGJG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.21

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.29

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.21

2.64

+0.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.71

8.22

+1.49

ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESJS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is comparable to the LGJG.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESJS.L and LGJG.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...

Drawdowns

ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESJS.L drawdown since its inception was -37.23%, which is greater than LGJG.L's maximum drawdown of -33.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESJS.L and LGJG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ESJS.LLGJG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.23%

-33.21%

-4.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.62%

-11.04%

+0.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.59%

-19.89%

+5.30%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.38%

-19.89%

+0.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.10%

-6.92%

+0.82%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.66%

-10.80%

-10.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.52%

3.55%

-0.03%

Volatility

ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI Japan ESG Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESJS.L) has a higher volatility of 6.75% compared to L&G Japan Equity UCITS ETF (LGJG.L) at 6.25%. This indicates that ESJS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LGJG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ESJS.LLGJG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.75%

6.25%

+0.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.89%

15.52%

+0.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.35%

18.77%

+0.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.27%

20.98%

-4.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.00%

21.34%

-1.34%

ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESJS.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than LGJG.L's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

ESJS.L vs. LGJG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ESJS.L nor LGJG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.98, ESJS.L and LGJG.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.

On fees, LGJG.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LGJG.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for ESJS.L.

Both ETFs track TOPIX TR JPY. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ESJS.L and 0.10% for LGJG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ESJS.L and LGJG.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