HMWD.L vs. LGGG.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

HMWD.L (HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF) and LGGG.L (L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, from HSBC and Legal & General respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HMWD.L returned 11.46%/yr vs 11.58%/yr for LGGG.L. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. HMWD.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for LGGG.L.

Performance

HMWD.L vs. LGGG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF (HMWD.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with HMWD.L having a 9.01% return and LGGG.L slightly lower at 9.00%.

HMWD.L

• 1D: -1.02%
• 1M: -0.68%
• 6M: 7.40%
• YTD: 9.01%
• 1Y: 20.26%
• 3Y*: 18.36%
• 5Y*: 11.46%
• 10Y*: 13.05%

LGGG.L

• 1D: -1.15%
• 1M: -0.07%
• 6M: 7.40%
• YTD: 9.00%
• 1Y: 20.29%
• 3Y*: 18.57%
• 5Y*: 11.58%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
HMWD.L HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF	9.01%	21.06%	19.12%	24.61%	-18.25%	22.44%	16.43%	27.45%	-9.21%
LGGG.L L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF	9.00%	21.45%	19.11%	24.31%	-18.05%	22.41%	15.85%	27.93%	-29.10%

Correlation

The correlation between HMWD.L and LGGG.L is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2018	0.92

The correlation between HMWD.L and LGGG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors	HMWD.L	LGGG.L
Technology	31.2%	31.5%
Financial Services	15.0%	15.2%
Industrials	10.9%	10.5%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	9.4%
Communication Services	8.9%	9.2%
Healthcare	8.6%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.8%	3.6%
Basic Materials	3.3%	3.2%
Utilities	2.5%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.7%	1.7%

Return for Risk

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

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

HMWD.L

HMWD.L Risk / Return Rank: 66
HMWD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
HMWD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
HMWD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 63
HMWD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
HMWD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 71

LGGG.L

LGGG.L Risk / Return Rank: 75
LGGG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
LGGG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
LGGG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 75
LGGG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
LGGG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF (HMWD.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.

	HMWD.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.64	1.71	-0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.51	2.55	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.30	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.43	2.31	+0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.95	9.78	+0.17

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

The current HMWD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is comparable to the LGGG.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMWD.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

HMWD.L vs. LGGG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMWD.L drawdown since its inception was -34.01%, smaller than the maximum LGGG.L drawdown of -37.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMWD.L and LGGG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	HMWD.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.01%	-37.64%	+3.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.30%	-8.74%	+0.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.58%	-18.96%	+1.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.99%	-26.41%	+0.42%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.01%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.20%	-1.55%	+0.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.75%	-8.76%	+4.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.03%	2.07%	-0.04%

Volatility

HMWD.L vs. LGGG.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF (HMWD.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.L) have volatilities of 3.05% and 3.08%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HMWD.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.05%	3.08%	-0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.88%	9.26%	+0.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.31%	11.83%	+0.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.63%	20.51%	-4.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.73%	21.77%	-6.04%

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

HMWD.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

HMWD.L vs. LGGG.L - Dividend Comparison

HMWD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, while LGGG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HMWD.L HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF	1.18%	1.24%	1.43%	1.57%	1.79%	1.31%	1.44%	1.91%	2.23%	1.81%	2.00%	1.93%
LGGG.L L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

With a correlation of 0.91, HMWD.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, HMWD.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, HMWD.L or LGGG.L?

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

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

Both ETFs track MSCI ACWI NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for HMWD.L and 0.10% for LGGG.L.