HMWO.L vs. LGGG.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

HMWO.L (HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF) and LGGG.L (L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds - HMWO.L tracks the MSCI World Index while LGGG.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HMWO.L returned 12.01%/yr vs 12.09%/yr for LGGG.L. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. HMWO.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for LGGG.L.

Performance

HMWO.L vs. LGGG.L - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with HMWO.L having a 9.10% return and LGGG.L slightly lower at 9.06%.

HMWO.L

• 1D: -0.89%
• 1M: -1.13%
• 6M: 6.86%
• YTD: 9.10%
• 1Y: 19.87%
• 3Y*: 17.22%
• 5Y*: 12.01%
• 10Y*: 12.79%

LGGG.L

• 1D: -0.94%
• 1M: -1.25%
• 6M: 6.82%
• YTD: 9.06%
• 1Y: 19.99%
• 3Y*: 17.35%
• 5Y*: 12.09%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
HMWO.L HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF	9.10%	12.63%	21.17%	17.80%	-8.47%	23.98%	12.48%	23.41%	-6.82%
LGGG.L L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF	9.06%	12.92%	21.13%	18.08%	-8.24%	23.53%	12.41%	22.99%	-27.80%

Correlation

The correlation between HMWO.L and LGGG.L is 0.99 - 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	0.99
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2018	0.98

The correlation between HMWO.L and LGGG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors	HMWO.L	LGGG.L
Technology	30.4%	31.5%
Financial Services	15.7%	15.2%
Industrials	11.3%	10.5%
Healthcare	9.3%	8.6%
Consumer Cyclical	8.9%	9.4%
Communication Services	8.3%	9.2%
Consumer Defensive	5.1%	4.9%
Energy	3.6%	3.6%
Basic Materials	3.1%	3.2%
Utilities	2.6%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.8%	1.7%

Return for Risk

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

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

HMWO.L

HMWO.L Risk / Return Rank: 75
HMWO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
HMWO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
HMWO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 75
HMWO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
HMWO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

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

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

	HMWO.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.88	1.89	-0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.63	2.66	-0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.35	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.04	2.98	+0.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.81	11.53	+0.28

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

The current HMWO.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is comparable to the LGGG.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMWO.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

HMWO.L vs. LGGG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMWO.L drawdown since its inception was -44.90%, which is greater than LGGG.L's maximum drawdown of -30.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMWO.L and LGGG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	HMWO.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.90%	-30.19%	-14.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.51%	-6.67%	+0.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.80%	-19.95%	+1.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.80%	-19.95%	+1.15%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.48%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.80%	-1.90%	+0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.77%	-7.13%	-2.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.68%	1.73%	-0.05%

Volatility

HMWO.L vs. LGGG.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF (HMWO.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.L) have volatilities of 2.64% and 2.73%, 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

	HMWO.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.64%	2.73%	-0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.83%	7.88%	-0.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.60%	10.57%	+0.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.32%	19.13%	-5.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.38%	20.30%	-5.92%

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

HMWO.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

HMWO.L vs. LGGG.L - Dividend Comparison

HMWO.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
HMWO.L HSBC MSCI World UCITS ETF	1.18%	1.26%	1.41%	1.60%	1.75%	1.27%	1.55%	1.97%	2.11%	1.91%	1.84%	1.86%
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 HMWO.L and LGGG.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.99, HMWO.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, HMWO.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, HMWO.L or LGGG.L?

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

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

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