PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GLGG.L vs. AQWA
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

GLGG.L vs. AQWA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF (GLGG.L) and Global X Clean Water ETF (AQWA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

GLGG.L vs. AQWA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
GLGG.L
L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF
0.32%7.81%5.74%14.58%-7.49%14.76%
AQWA
Global X Clean Water ETF
3.03%5.09%6.16%14.13%-10.36%17.64%
Different Trading Currencies

GLGG.L is traded in GBp, while AQWA is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the AQWA values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLGG.L achieves a 0.32% return, which is significantly lower than AQWA's 3.03% return.


GLGG.L

1D
-0.30%
1M
-10.08%
YTD
0.32%
6M
-0.56%
1Y
12.04%
3Y*
8.40%
5Y*
7.37%
10Y*

AQWA

1D
1.68%
1M
-7.03%
YTD
3.03%
6M
0.11%
1Y
10.62%
3Y*
8.24%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


GLGG.L vs. AQWA - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLGG.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than AQWA's 0.50% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

GLGG.L vs. AQWA — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLGG.L
GLGG.L Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
GLGG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLGG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLGG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
GLGG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLGG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank

AQWA
AQWA Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
AQWA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AQWA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
AQWA Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
AQWA Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
AQWA Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
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.

GLGG.L vs. AQWA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF (GLGG.L) and Global X Clean Water ETF (AQWA). 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.


GLGG.LAQWADifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.79

0.68

+0.12

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.13

1.09

+0.04

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.13

+0.02

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.98

1.02

-0.04

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

3.22

3.15

+0.08

GLGG.L vs. AQWA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLGG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.79, which is comparable to the AQWA Sharpe Ratio of 0.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLGG.L and AQWA, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GLGG.LAQWADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.79

0.68

+0.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.45

+0.13

Correlation

The correlation between GLGG.L and AQWA is 0.56, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.


Dividends

GLGG.L vs. AQWA - Dividend Comparison

GLGG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AQWA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.45%.


TTM20252024202320222021
GLGG.L
L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
AQWA
Global X Clean Water ETF
1.45%1.47%1.40%1.53%1.56%1.20%

Drawdowns

GLGG.L vs. AQWA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLGG.L drawdown since its inception was -27.08%, which is greater than AQWA's maximum drawdown of -22.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLGG.L and AQWA.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


GLGG.LAQWADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.08%

-29.44%

+2.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.62%

-11.48%

-0.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.08%

-9.17%

-0.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.06%

-8.27%

+3.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.53%

3.48%

+0.05%

Volatility

GLGG.L vs. AQWA - Volatility Comparison

L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF (GLGG.L) has a higher volatility of 6.04% compared to Global X Clean Water ETF (AQWA) at 5.30%. This indicates that GLGG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AQWA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


GLGG.LAQWADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.04%

5.30%

+0.74%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.07%

10.25%

-0.18%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.12%

15.73%

-0.61%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.91%

15.03%

-0.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.69%

15.03%

+2.66%