FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FWRA.L (Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation) and LGGL.L (L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds - FWRA.L tracks the FTSE All-World Index while LGGL.L tracks the Solactive Core Developed Markets Large & Mid Cap USD Index NTR. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FWRA.L returned 24.63% vs 22.62% for LGGL.L. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FWRA.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for LGGL.L.

Performance

FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FWRA.L achieves a 9.51% return, which is significantly higher than LGGL.L's 8.05% return.

FWRA.L

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: -0.32%
• YTD: 9.51%
• 6M: 9.51%
• 1Y: 24.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LGGL.L

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: -0.67%
• YTD: 8.05%
• 6M: 7.84%
• 1Y: 22.62%
• 3Y*: 19.89%
• 5Y*: 11.42%
• 10Y*: —

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

FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FWRA.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation	9.51%	22.42%	18.04%	10.02%
LGGL.L L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF	8.05%	21.18%	19.20%	10.40%

Correlation

The correlation between FWRA.L and LGGL.L is 0.96 - 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	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2023	0.95

The correlation between FWRA.L and LGGL.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FWRA.L	LGGL.L
Technology	32.8%	31.5%
Financial Services	16.1%	15.2%
Industrials	10.3%	10.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.7%	9.4%
Communication Services	7.9%	9.2%
Healthcare	7.3%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	4.9%
Basic Materials	3.6%	3.2%
Energy	3.4%	3.6%
Utilities	2.7%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.6%	1.7%

Return for Risk

FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FWRA.L

FWRA.L Risk / Return Rank: 68
FWRA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
FWRA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
FWRA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 68
FWRA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
FWRA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 70

LGGL.L

LGGL.L Risk / Return Rank: 67
LGGL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
LGGL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
LGGL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
LGGL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
LGGL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	FWRA.L	LGGL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.93	1.85	+0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.89	2.81	+0.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.34	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.81	2.67	+0.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.42	11.15	+0.27

FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FWRA.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.93, which is comparable to the LGGL.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FWRA.L and LGGL.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

FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FWRA.L drawdown since its inception was -16.50%, smaller than the maximum LGGL.L drawdown of -33.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FWRA.L and LGGL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FWRA.L	LGGL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.50%	-33.89%	+17.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.78%	-8.42%	-0.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.50%	-17.79%	+1.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.54%	-2.12%	-0.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.92%	-4.94%	+3.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.16%	2.02%	+0.14%

Volatility

FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.L) has a higher volatility of 4.15% compared to L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGL.L) at 3.84%. This indicates that FWRA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LGGL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FWRA.L	LGGL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.15%	3.84%	+0.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.44%	9.72%	+0.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.86%	12.26%	+0.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.67%	15.64%	-1.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.67%	17.15%	-3.48%

FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FWRA.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than LGGL.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

FWRA.L vs. LGGL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FWRA.L nor LGGL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FWRA.L and LGGL.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, FWRA.L and LGGL.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, FWRA.L or LGGL.L?

On fees, LGGL.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, FWRA.L or LGGL.L?

LGGL.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for FWRA.L.

What is the main difference between FWRA.L and LGGL.L?

FWRA.L tracks FTSE All-World Index, while LGGL.L tracks Solactive Core Developed Markets Large & Mid Cap USD Index NTR. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and L&G. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FWRA.L and 0.10% for LGGL.L.