HTWG.L vs. BATG.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HTWG.L (L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF) and BATG.L (L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - HTWG.L tracks the Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR while BATG.L tracks the Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HTWG.L returned 2.77%/yr vs 17.96%/yr for BATG.L. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.49% expense ratio.

Performance

HTWG.L vs. BATG.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 Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HTWG.L achieves a 57.21% return, which is significantly higher than BATG.L's 37.63% 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*: —

BATG.L

• 1D: -1.34%
• 1M: 2.71%
• YTD: 37.63%
• 6M: 44.30%
• 1Y: 135.61%
• 3Y*: 26.06%
• 5Y*: 17.96%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
HTWG.L L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF	57.21%	30.68%	-6.72%	-8.50%	-29.54%	-27.07%
BATG.L L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF	37.63%	60.42%	0.47%	2.83%	-3.91%	7.29%

Correlation

The correlation between HTWG.L and BATG.L is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.68
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2021	0.70

The correlation between HTWG.L and BATG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors	HTWG.L	BATG.L
Industrials	53.6%	31.2%
Basic Materials	25.4%	24.4%
Consumer Cyclical	11.3%	20.1%
Utilities	9.7%	6.7%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	17.6%

Return for Risk

HTWG.L vs. BATG.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: 93
HTWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
HTWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
HTWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 91
HTWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
HTWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 90

BATG.L

BATG.L Risk / Return Rank: 96
BATG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
BATG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
BATG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 94
BATG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
BATG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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. BATG.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 Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.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.L	BATG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.05	4.86	-0.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.70	5.16	-0.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.70	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.66	9.91	-2.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.53	34.05	-13.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current HTWG.L Sharpe Ratio is 4.05, which is comparable to the BATG.L Sharpe Ratio of 4.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HTWG.L and BATG.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HTWG.L	BATG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.05	4.86	-0.81
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.11	0.80	-0.69
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.07	0.82	-0.89

Drawdowns

HTWG.L vs. BATG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HTWG.L drawdown since its inception was -63.70%, which is greater than BATG.L's maximum drawdown of -33.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HTWG.L and BATG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	HTWG.L	BATG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-63.70%	-33.37%	-30.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.13%	-13.61%	-1.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.33%	-33.37%	+1.04%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-56.98%	-33.37%	-23.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.89%	-1.75%	-8.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-42.92%	-8.99%	-33.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.65%	3.97%	+1.68%

Volatility

HTWG.L vs. BATG.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF (HTWG.L) has a higher volatility of 10.99% compared to L&G Battery Value-Chain UCITS ETF (BATG.L) at 9.84%. This indicates that HTWG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BATG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HTWG.L	BATG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.99%	9.84%	+1.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.16%	21.92%	-3.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.63%	27.78%	+0.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.12%	22.51%	+3.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.48%	22.84%	+3.64%

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

Both HTWG.L and BATG.L have an expense ratio of 0.49%.

Dividends

HTWG.L vs. BATG.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HTWG.L and BATG.L in my portfolio?

HTWG.L and BATG.L have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, HTWG.L or BATG.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.49% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HTWG.L or BATG.L?

HTWG.L and BATG.L have the same expense ratio: 0.49% per year.

What is the main difference between HTWG.L and BATG.L?

HTWG.L tracks Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR, while BATG.L tracks Solactive Battery Value-Chain Index. They also come from different issuers: L&G and Legal & General Investment Management.