PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF (HTWG.L) and L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HTWG.L achieves a 57.21% return, which is significantly higher than AUCO.L's -1.08% return.


HTWG.L

1D
-1.54%
1M
8.95%
YTD
57.21%
6M
52.03%
1Y
116.48%
3Y*
21.12%
5Y*
2.77%
10Y*

AUCO.L

1D
-2.00%
1M
-2.02%
YTD
-1.08%
6M
3.34%
1Y
66.87%
3Y*
45.87%
5Y*
23.41%
10Y*
16.69%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
HTWG.L
L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF
57.21%30.68%-6.72%-8.50%-29.54%-27.07%
AUCO.L
L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF
-1.08%161.75%20.02%9.27%-4.09%-5.22%

Correlation

The correlation between HTWG.L and AUCO.L is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.33

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.30

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2021

0.27

HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
HTWG.L
AUCO.L

Industrials

53.6%

-

Basic Materials

25.4%
100.0%

Consumer Cyclical

11.3%

-

Utilities

9.7%

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Industrials

HTWG.L
53.6%
AUCO.L

-

Basic Materials

HTWG.L
25.4%
AUCO.L
100.0%

Consumer Cyclical

HTWG.L
11.3%
AUCO.L

-

Utilities

HTWG.L
9.7%
AUCO.L

-

Communication Services

HTWG.L

-

AUCO.L

-

Consumer Defensive

HTWG.L

-

AUCO.L

-

Energy

HTWG.L

-

AUCO.L

-

Financial Services

HTWG.L

-

AUCO.L

-

Healthcare

HTWG.L

-

AUCO.L

-

Real Estate

HTWG.L

-

AUCO.L

-

Technology

HTWG.L

-

AUCO.L

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

HTWG.L
HTWG.L Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
HTWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HTWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
HTWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
HTWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
HTWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

AUCO.L
AUCO.L Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
AUCO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AUCO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
AUCO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
AUCO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
AUCO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
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.

HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF (HTWG.L) and L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.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.


HTWG.LAUCO.LDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

4.05

1.52

+2.53

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.70

1.98

+2.72

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.26

+0.35

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

7.66

2.23

+5.43

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

20.53

5.87

+14.66

HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HTWG.L Sharpe Ratio is 4.05, which is higher than the AUCO.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HTWG.L and AUCO.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


HTWG.LAUCO.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.05

1.52

+2.53

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.11

0.66

-0.55

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.07

0.30

-0.37

Drawdowns

HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HTWG.L drawdown since its inception was -63.70%, smaller than the maximum AUCO.L drawdown of -77.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HTWG.L and AUCO.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HTWG.LAUCO.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-63.70%

-77.65%

+13.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.13%

-29.84%

+14.71%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-32.33%

-29.84%

-2.49%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-56.98%

-39.29%

-17.69%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.89%

-26.17%

+16.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-42.92%

-35.95%

-6.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.65%

11.36%

-5.71%

Volatility

HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF (HTWG.L) is 10.99%, while L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) has a volatility of 15.20%. This indicates that HTWG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AUCO.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HTWG.LAUCO.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.99%

15.20%

-4.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.16%

34.95%

-16.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.63%

43.87%

-15.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.12%

35.66%

-9.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.48%

34.14%

-7.66%

HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HTWG.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than AUCO.L's 0.55% expense ratio.


Dividends

HTWG.L vs. AUCO.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither HTWG.L nor AUCO.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


HTWG.L and AUCO.L have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HTWG.L is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HTWG.L is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for AUCO.L.

HTWG.L is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while AUCO.L is Gold. HTWG.L tracks Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR, while AUCO.L tracks STOXX Global Gold Miners Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for HTWG.L and 0.55% for AUCO.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HTWG.L and AUCO.L

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer