FOGB.L vs. AIAG.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

FOGB.L (Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF Class A USD (Acc)) and AIAG.L (L&G Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FOGB.L is a Agriculture Equities fund tracking the Solactive RIZE ETF Sustainable Future of Food Index, while AIAG.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FOGB.L returned -8.36%/yr vs 15.50%/yr for AIAG.L. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FOGB.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for AIAG.L.

Performance

FOGB.L vs. AIAG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF Class A USD (Acc) (FOGB.L) and L&G Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF (AIAG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FOGB.L achieves a 5.47% return, which is significantly lower than AIAG.L's 29.41% return.

FOGB.L

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 2.11%
• 6M: 0.15%
• YTD: 5.47%
• 1Y: -2.53%
• 3Y*: -4.82%
• 5Y*: -8.36%
• 10Y*: —

AIAG.L

• 1D: -2.94%
• 1M: -7.05%
• 6M: 25.33%
• YTD: 29.41%
• 1Y: 50.22%
• 3Y*: 29.02%
• 5Y*: 15.50%
• 10Y*: —

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

FOGB.L vs. AIAG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FOGB.L Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF Class A USD (Acc)	5.47%	-9.49%	-5.72%	-6.98%	-18.26%	2.56%	9.19%
AIAG.L L&G Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF	29.41%	21.44%	20.57%	50.58%	-33.18%	11.07%	14.68%

Correlation

The correlation between FOGB.L and AIAG.L is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 3, 2020	0.48

Over the past year, the correlation between FOGB.L and AIAG.L has dropped to 0.18 - well below their long-term average of 0.48, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

FOGB.L vs. AIAG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FOGB.L

FOGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 8
FOGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
FOGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
FOGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8
FOGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
FOGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9

AIAG.L

AIAG.L Risk / Return Rank: 66
AIAG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
AIAG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
AIAG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 63
AIAG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
AIAG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

FOGB.L vs. AIAG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF Class A USD (Acc) (FOGB.L) and L&G Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF (AIAG.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.

	FOGB.L	AIAG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.17	1.82	-1.99
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.13	2.41	-2.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.98	1.30	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.20	2.97	-3.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.32	7.62	-7.94

FOGB.L vs. AIAG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FOGB.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.17, which is lower than the AIAG.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FOGB.L and AIAG.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

FOGB.L vs. AIAG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FOGB.L drawdown since its inception was -43.46%, roughly equal to the maximum AIAG.L drawdown of -41.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FOGB.L and AIAG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FOGB.L	AIAG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.46%	-41.56%	-1.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.73%	-16.80%	+4.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.44%	-30.73%	+7.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.46%	-41.56%	-1.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-37.73%	-11.04%	-26.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.51%	-14.06%	-10.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.79%	6.57%	+1.22%

Volatility

FOGB.L vs. AIAG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF Class A USD (Acc) (FOGB.L) is 4.50%, while L&G Artificial Intelligence UCITS ETF (AIAG.L) has a volatility of 9.86%. This indicates that FOGB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AIAG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FOGB.L	AIAG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.50%	9.86%	-5.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.03%	21.83%	-10.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.10%	27.49%	-12.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.84%	30.05%	-14.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.44%	30.30%	-14.86%

FOGB.L vs. AIAG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FOGB.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than AIAG.L's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

FOGB.L vs. AIAG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FOGB.L nor AIAG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FOGB.L and AIAG.L in my portfolio?

FOGB.L and AIAG.L have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FOGB.L or AIAG.L?

On fees, FOGB.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FOGB.L or AIAG.L?

FOGB.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for AIAG.L.

What is the main difference between FOGB.L and AIAG.L?

FOGB.L is categorized as Agriculture Equities, while AIAG.L is Technology Equities. FOGB.L tracks Solactive RIZE ETF Sustainable Future of Food Index, while AIAG.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Rize ETF and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FOGB.L and 0.49% for AIAG.L.