FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FTWG.L (Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist) and LGGG.L (L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds - FTWG.L tracks the FTSE All-World Index while LGGG.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FTWG.L returned 29.13% vs 26.71% for LGGG.L. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FTWG.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for LGGG.L.

Performance

FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FTWG.L achieves a 12.01% return, which is significantly higher than LGGG.L's 10.39% return.

FTWG.L

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 1.84%
• YTD: 12.01%
• 6M: 12.72%
• 1Y: 29.13%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LGGG.L

• 1D: 0.57%
• 1M: 1.37%
• YTD: 10.39%
• 6M: 10.50%
• 1Y: 26.71%
• 3Y*: 18.49%
• 5Y*: 12.63%
• 10Y*: —

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

FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FTWG.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist	12.01%	14.12%	19.92%	-13.67%
LGGG.L L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF	10.39%	12.92%	21.13%	10.18%

Correlation

The correlation between FTWG.L and LGGG.L is 0.97 - 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	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2023	0.94

The correlation between FTWG.L and LGGG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FTWG.L	LGGG.L
Technology	31.5%	31.5%
Financial Services	16.2%	15.2%
Industrials	10.4%	10.5%
Consumer Cyclical	9.0%	9.4%
Communication Services	8.4%	9.2%
Healthcare	7.7%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	4.0%	3.6%
Basic Materials	3.6%	3.2%
Utilities	2.4%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.8%	1.7%

Return for Risk

FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FTWG.L

FTWG.L Risk / Return Rank: 88
FTWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
FTWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
FTWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
FTWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
FTWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 86

LGGG.L

LGGG.L Risk / Return Rank: 86
LGGG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
LGGG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
LGGG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 88
LGGG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
LGGG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.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.

	FTWG.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.71	2.55	+0.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.73	3.53	+0.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.48	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.08	3.98	+0.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.22	15.60	+0.63

FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTWG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is comparable to the LGGG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTWG.L and LGGG.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

FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTWG.L drawdown since its inception was -22.14%, smaller than the maximum LGGG.L drawdown of -30.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTWG.L and LGGG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FTWG.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.14%	-30.19%	+8.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.11%	-6.67%	-0.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.14%	-19.95%	-2.19%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.95%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.93%	-0.71%	-0.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.63%	-7.18%	+0.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.79%	1.71%	+0.08%

Volatility

FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist (FTWG.L) has a higher volatility of 3.65% compared to L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.L) at 3.14%. This indicates that FTWG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LGGG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FTWG.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.65%	3.14%	+0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.13%	7.77%	+0.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.70%	10.46%	+0.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.72%	19.12%	-2.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.72%	20.37%	-3.65%

FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTWG.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than LGGG.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

FTWG.L vs. LGGG.L - Dividend Comparison

FTWG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.25%, while LGGG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FTWG.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Dist	1.25%	1.34%	1.50%	0.70%
LGGG.L L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FTWG.L and LGGG.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, FTWG.L and LGGG.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.

Which ETF is better, FTWG.L or LGGG.L?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, FTWG.L or LGGG.L?

LGGG.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for FTWG.L.

What is the main difference between FTWG.L and LGGG.L?

FTWG.L tracks FTSE All-World Index, while LGGG.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FTWG.L and 0.10% for LGGG.L.