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

Performance

HTWG.L vs. RTWO.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 Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

HTWG.L vs. RTWO.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%
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

53.6%
17.7%

Basic Materials

25.4%
4.6%

Consumer Cyclical

11.3%
9.3%

Utilities

9.7%
2.9%

Communication Services

-

2.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.8%

Energy

-

5.9%

Financial Services

-

15.6%

Healthcare

-

14.3%

Real Estate

-

6.1%

Technology

-

18.5%

Industrials

HTWG.L
53.6%
RTWO.L
17.7%

Basic Materials

HTWG.L
25.4%
RTWO.L
4.6%

Consumer Cyclical

HTWG.L
11.3%
RTWO.L
9.3%

Utilities

HTWG.L
9.7%
RTWO.L
2.9%

Communication Services

HTWG.L

-

RTWO.L
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

HTWG.L

-

RTWO.L
2.8%

Energy

HTWG.L

-

RTWO.L
5.9%

Financial Services

HTWG.L

-

RTWO.L
15.6%

Healthcare

HTWG.L

-

RTWO.L
14.3%

Real Estate

HTWG.L

-

RTWO.L
6.1%

Technology

HTWG.L

-

RTWO.L
18.5%

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

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

RTWO.L
RTWO.L Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
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. 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.LRTWO.LDifference
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

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

The current HTWG.L Sharpe Ratio is 4.05, which is higher than the RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HTWG.L and RTWO.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.LRTWO.LDifference

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.LRTWO.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.89%

-0.76%

-9.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-42.92%

-7.11%

-35.81%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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.LRTWO.LDifference

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.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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