IMID.L vs. LGGL.L

Last updated Jul 7, 2026

IMID.L (SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI UCITS ETF) and LGGL.L (L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds - IMID.L tracks the MSCI ACWI Investable Market Index while LGGL.L tracks the Solactive Core Developed Markets Large & Mid Cap USD Index NTR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IMID.L returned -41.77%/yr vs 11.66%/yr for LGGL.L. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IMID.L charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for LGGL.L.

Performance

IMID.L vs. LGGL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI UCITS ETF (IMID.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMID.L achieves a -95.51% return, which is significantly lower than LGGL.L's 10.07% return.

IMID.L

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 1.62%
• 6M: -95.56%
• YTD: -95.51%
• 1Y: -95.00%
• 3Y*: -58.96%
• 5Y*: -41.77%
• 10Y*: -18.50%

LGGL.L

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: 1.30%
• 6M: 9.28%
• YTD: 10.07%
• 1Y: 22.01%
• 3Y*: 20.24%
• 5Y*: 11.66%
• 10Y*: —

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

IMID.L vs. LGGL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
IMID.L SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI UCITS ETF	-95.51%	22.16%	16.31%	21.65%	-17.64%	17.85%	16.14%	25.35%	-9.02%
LGGL.L L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF	10.07%	21.18%	19.20%	25.02%	-18.03%	21.94%	16.35%	26.98%	-7.73%

Correlation

The correlation between IMID.L and LGGL.L is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2018	0.97

The correlation between IMID.L and LGGL.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

IMID.L vs. LGGL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IMID.L	LGGL.L
Technology	31.7%	31.5%
Financial Services	15.0%	15.2%
Industrials	11.8%	10.5%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	9.4%
Communication Services	8.2%	9.2%
Healthcare	7.7%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.3%	4.9%
Basic Materials	4.0%	3.2%
Energy	3.7%	3.6%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	2.1%	1.7%

Return for Risk

IMID.L vs. LGGL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMID.L

IMID.L Risk / Return Rank: 1
IMID.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
IMID.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
IMID.L Omega Ratio Rank: 0
IMID.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
IMID.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1

LGGL.L

LGGL.L Risk / Return Rank: 68
LGGL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
LGGL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
LGGL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 67
LGGL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
LGGL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 71

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.

IMID.L vs. LGGL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI UCITS ETF (IMID.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGL.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	IMID.L	LGGL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.98	1.81	-2.79
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.76	2.74	-3.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.55	1.33	-0.78
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.99	2.60	-3.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.49	10.75	-12.24

IMID.L vs. LGGL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMID.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.98, which is lower than the LGGL.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMID.L and LGGL.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.

Drawdowns

IMID.L vs. LGGL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMID.L drawdown since its inception was -96.27%, which is greater than LGGL.L's maximum drawdown of -33.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMID.L and LGGL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMID.L	LGGL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-96.27%	-33.89%	-62.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-96.27%	-8.42%	-87.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-96.27%	-17.79%	-78.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-96.27%	-25.76%	-70.51%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-96.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-95.62%	-0.29%	-95.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.71%	-4.93%	-2.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	63.93%	2.04%	+61.89%

Volatility

IMID.L vs. LGGL.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI UCITS ETF (IMID.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGL.L) have volatilities of 3.92% and 3.75%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IMID.L	LGGL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.92%	3.75%	+0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	321.60%	9.72%	+311.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	96.96%	12.16%	+84.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	45.77%	15.64%	+30.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.13%	17.12%	+19.01%

IMID.L vs. LGGL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMID.L has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is higher than LGGL.L's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IMID.L vs. LGGL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IMID.L nor LGGL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IMID.L and LGGL.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, IMID.L and LGGL.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, IMID.L or LGGL.L?

On fees, LGGL.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMID.L or LGGL.L?

LGGL.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.17% for IMID.L.

What is the main difference between IMID.L and LGGL.L?

IMID.L tracks MSCI ACWI Investable Market Index, while LGGL.L tracks Solactive Core Developed Markets Large & Mid Cap USD Index NTR. They also come from different issuers: State Street and L&G. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for IMID.L and 0.10% for LGGL.L.