GLUG.L vs. EMUG.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

GLUG.L (L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and EMUG.L (L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - GLUG.L is a Water Equities fund tracking the Solactive Clean Water Index NTR, while EMUG.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GLUG.L returned 6.20%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for EMUG.L. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GLUG.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for EMUG.L.

Performance

GLUG.L vs. EMUG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GLUG.L) and L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLUG.L achieves a 5.95% return, which is significantly higher than EMUG.L's -4.27% return.

GLUG.L

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 1.36%
• 6M: 0.23%
• YTD: 5.95%
• 1Y: 9.33%
• 3Y*: 11.06%
• 5Y*: 6.20%
• 10Y*: —

EMUG.L

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: -2.27%
• 6M: -1.75%
• YTD: -4.27%
• 1Y: -0.49%
• 3Y*: 4.56%
• 5Y*: 0.55%
• 10Y*: —

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

GLUG.L vs. EMUG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
GLUG.L L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	5.95%	15.76%	4.02%	21.24%	-17.39%	19.60%
EMUG.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	-4.27%	8.73%	5.56%	6.37%	-11.48%	-25.61%

Correlation

The correlation between GLUG.L and EMUG.L is 0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.14
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 15, 2021	0.12

Return for Risk

GLUG.L vs. EMUG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLUG.L

GLUG.L Risk / Return Rank: 22
GLUG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
GLUG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
GLUG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 21
GLUG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
GLUG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 21

EMUG.L

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

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.

GLUG.L vs. EMUG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GLUG.L) and L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUG.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.

	GLUG.L	EMUG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.59	-0.08	+0.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.95	-0.06	+1.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	0.99	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.73	-0.10	+0.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.70	-0.28	+1.98

GLUG.L vs. EMUG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLUG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.59, which is higher than the EMUG.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLUG.L and EMUG.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

GLUG.L vs. EMUG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLUG.L drawdown since its inception was -35.67%, smaller than the maximum EMUG.L drawdown of -39.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLUG.L and EMUG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLUG.L	EMUG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.67%	-39.59%	+3.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.66%	-4.82%	-7.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.61%	-4.82%	-11.79%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.10%	-19.63%	-10.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.19%	-23.49%	+18.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.43%	-28.13%	+20.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.47%	1.75%	+3.72%

Volatility

GLUG.L vs. EMUG.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GLUG.L) has a higher volatility of 4.96% compared to L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUG.L) at 3.69%. This indicates that GLUG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMUG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLUG.L	EMUG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.96%	3.69%	+1.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.11%	5.36%	+7.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.94%	6.44%	+9.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.65%	6.93%	+10.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.39%	13.12%	+6.27%

GLUG.L vs. EMUG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLUG.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than EMUG.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLUG.L vs. EMUG.L - Dividend Comparison

GLUG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EMUG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.03%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EMUG.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	0.03%	5.99%	4.86%	4.67%	3.61%	1.14%
GLUG.L L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLUG.L and EMUG.L in my portfolio?

GLUG.L and EMUG.L have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GLUG.L or EMUG.L?

On fees, EMUG.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLUG.L or EMUG.L?

EMUG.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for GLUG.L.

What is the main difference between GLUG.L and EMUG.L?

GLUG.L is categorized as Water Equities, while EMUG.L is Emerging Markets Bonds. GLUG.L tracks Solactive Clean Water Index NTR, while EMUG.L tracks J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for GLUG.L and 0.35% for EMUG.L.