HTWG.L vs. RTWO.L
HTWG.L (L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF) and RTWO.L (L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - HTWG.L is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR, while RTWO.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HTWG.L returned 2.77%/yr vs 8.09%/yr for RTWO.L. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HTWG.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for RTWO.L.
Performance
HTWG.L vs. RTWO.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
HTWG.L is traded in GBp, while RTWO.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the RTWO.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 RTWO.L's 15.80% 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*
- —
RTWO.L
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 4.09%
- YTD
- 15.80%
- 6M
- 15.51%
- 1Y
- 34.65%
- 3Y*
- 14.43%
- 5Y*
- 8.09%
- 10Y*
- 12.12%
HTWG.L vs. RTWO.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% |
RTWO.L L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc | 15.80% | 3.40% | 11.13% | 14.05% | -9.01% | 5.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between HTWG.L and RTWO.L is 0.64, 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 | 0.64 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2021 | 0.67 |
The correlation between HTWG.L and RTWO.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.
HTWG.L vs. RTWO.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
HTWG.L
RTWO.L
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Industrials
HTWG.L
RTWO.L
Basic Materials
HTWG.L
RTWO.L
Consumer Cyclical
HTWG.L
RTWO.L
Utilities
HTWG.L
RTWO.L
Communication Services
HTWG.L
-
RTWO.L
Consumer Defensive
HTWG.L
-
RTWO.L
Energy
HTWG.L
-
RTWO.L
Financial Services
HTWG.L
-
RTWO.L
Healthcare
HTWG.L
-
RTWO.L
Real Estate
HTWG.L
-
RTWO.L
Technology
HTWG.L
-
RTWO.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. RTWO.L — Risk / Return Rank
HTWG.L
RTWO.L
HTWG.L vs. RTWO.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 Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.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 | RTWO.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.98 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.85 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.60 | 1.35 | +0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.66 | 4.54 | +3.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.53 | 13.71 | +6.82 |
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 | RTWO.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.05 | 2.07 | +1.98 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 | 0.40 | -0.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.57 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.07 | 0.62 | -0.70 |
Drawdowns
HTWG.L vs. RTWO.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HTWG.L drawdown since its inception was -63.70%, which is greater than RTWO.L's maximum drawdown of -35.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HTWG.L and RTWO.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HTWG.L | RTWO.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.70% | -35.69% | -28.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.13% | -7.60% | -7.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -32.33% | -28.41% | -3.92% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.98% | -28.41% | -28.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.89% | -0.76% | -9.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -42.92% | -7.11% | -35.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.65% | 2.52% | +3.13% |
Volatility
HTWG.L vs. RTWO.L - Volatility Comparison
L&G Hydrogen Economy UCITS ETF (HTWG.L) has a higher volatility of 10.99% compared to L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L) at 5.31%. This indicates that HTWG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RTWO.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HTWG.L | RTWO.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.99% | 5.31% | +5.68% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.16% | 12.09% | +6.07% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.63% | 16.73% | +11.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.12% | 20.10% | +6.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.48% | 21.11% | +5.37% |
HTWG.L vs. RTWO.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
HTWG.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than RTWO.L's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
HTWG.L vs. RTWO.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither HTWG.L nor RTWO.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
HTWG.L and RTWO.L have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RTWO.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RTWO.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for HTWG.L.
HTWG.L is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while RTWO.L is Small Cap Blend Equities. HTWG.L tracks Solactive Hydrogen Economy Index NTR, while RTWO.L tracks Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for HTWG.L and 0.30% for RTWO.L.
Find the right allocation for HTWG.L and RTWO.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