HTWG.L vs. LDGL.L
HTWG.L (L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF) and LDGL.L (L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing) are both exchange-traded funds - HTWG.L is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR, while LDGL.L is a Global Equity Income fund tracking the FTSE Developed All Cap Dividend Growth with Quality Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HTWG.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for LDGL.L.
Performance
HTWG.L vs. LDGL.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
HTWG.L is traded in GBp, while LDGL.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the LDGL.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
HTWG.L
- 1D
- -1.54%
- 1M
- 8.95%
- YTD
- 57.21%
- 6M
- 52.03%
- 1Y
- 116.48%
- 3Y*
- 21.12%
- 5Y*
- 2.77%
- 10Y*
- —
LDGL.L
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 1.79%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HTWG.L vs. LDGL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
HTWG.L L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF | 39.92% |
LDGL.L L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing | 7.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between HTWG.L and LDGL.L is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 16, 2026 | 0.55 |
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. LDGL.L — Risk / Return Rank
HTWG.L
LDGL.L
HTWG.L vs. LDGL.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 Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing (LDGL.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 | LDGL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.60 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.66 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.53 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HTWG.L | LDGL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.05 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.07 | 1.47 | -1.54 |
Drawdowns
HTWG.L vs. LDGL.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HTWG.L drawdown since its inception was -63.70%, which is greater than LDGL.L's maximum drawdown of -8.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HTWG.L and LDGL.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HTWG.L | LDGL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.70% | -8.76% | -54.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.13% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -32.33% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.98% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.89% | -1.15% | -8.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -42.92% | -2.71% | -40.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.65% | — | — |
Volatility
HTWG.L vs. LDGL.L - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HTWG.L | LDGL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.99% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.16% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.63% | 14.39% | +14.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.12% | 14.39% | +11.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.48% | 14.39% | +12.09% |
HTWG.L vs. LDGL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
HTWG.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than LDGL.L's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
HTWG.L vs. LDGL.L - Dividend Comparison
HTWG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LDGL.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%.
| Position | TTM |
|---|---|
HTWG.L L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF | 0.00% |
LDGL.L L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing | 1.31% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HTWG.L and LDGL.L have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LDGL.L is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LDGL.L is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for HTWG.L.
HTWG.L is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while LDGL.L is Global Equity Income. HTWG.L tracks Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR, while LDGL.L tracks FTSE Developed All Cap Dividend Growth with Quality Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for HTWG.L and 0.29% for LDGL.L.
Find the right allocation for HTWG.L and LDGL.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