IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

IWFQ.L (iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS) and LGGG.L (L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF) are both Global Equities funds tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, from iShares and Legal & General respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWFQ.L returned 10.98%/yr vs 12.50%/yr for LGGG.L. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IWFQ.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for LGGG.L.

Performance

IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with IWFQ.L having a 9.49% return and LGGG.L slightly higher at 9.76%.

IWFQ.L

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 1.24%
• YTD: 9.49%
• 6M: 9.69%
• 1Y: 23.42%
• 3Y*: 16.14%
• 5Y*: 10.98%
• 10Y*: 12.95%

LGGG.L

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: 0.40%
• YTD: 9.76%
• 6M: 9.88%
• 1Y: 26.00%
• 3Y*: 18.26%
• 5Y*: 12.50%
• 10Y*: —

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

IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
IWFQ.L iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS	9.49%	7.40%	18.93%	19.15%	-9.55%	25.17%	10.93%	25.86%	-6.45%
LGGG.L L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF	9.76%	12.92%	21.13%	18.08%	-8.24%	23.53%	12.41%	22.99%	-27.80%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFQ.L and LGGG.L is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2018	0.96

The correlation between IWFQ.L and LGGG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWFQ.L	LGGG.L
Technology	30.8%	31.5%
Financial Services	14.9%	15.2%
Industrials	10.2%	10.5%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	9.4%
Communication Services	9.0%	9.2%
Healthcare	9.0%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.0%	4.9%
Energy	4.0%	3.6%
Basic Materials	3.3%	3.2%
Utilities	2.6%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.7%	1.7%

Return for Risk

IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWFQ.L

IWFQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 82
IWFQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
IWFQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
IWFQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 85
IWFQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
IWFQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 82

LGGG.L

LGGG.L Risk / Return Rank: 86
LGGG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
LGGG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
LGGG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 88
LGGG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
LGGG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.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.

	IWFQ.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.37	2.47	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.36	3.44	-0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.47	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.33	3.88	-0.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.19	15.16	-0.97

IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFQ.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is comparable to the LGGG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFQ.L and LGGG.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

IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFQ.L drawdown since its inception was -40.49%, which is greater than LGGG.L's maximum drawdown of -30.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFQ.L and LGGG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWFQ.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.49%	-30.19%	-10.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.01%	-6.67%	-0.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.20%	-19.95%	-0.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.20%	-19.95%	-0.25%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-23.91%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.76%	-1.27%	+0.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.95%	-7.18%	-1.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.65%	1.71%	-0.06%

Volatility

IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L) is 2.66%, while L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.L) has a volatility of 3.20%. This indicates that IWFQ.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LGGG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWFQ.L	LGGG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.66%	3.20%	-0.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.30%	7.79%	-0.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.85%	10.47%	-0.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.20%	19.12%	+0.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.28%	20.36%	-3.08%

IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFQ.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than LGGG.L's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWFQ.L vs. LGGG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWFQ.L nor LGGG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWFQ.L and LGGG.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, IWFQ.L and LGGG.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, IWFQ.L or LGGG.L?

On fees, LGGG.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, IWFQ.L or LGGG.L?

LGGG.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for IWFQ.L.

What is the main difference between IWFQ.L and LGGG.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI ACWI NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for IWFQ.L and 0.10% for LGGG.L.