PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JPTC.L vs. LGGL.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

JPTC.L vs. LGGL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in JPMorgan Carbon Transition Global Equity UCITS ETF USD (acc) (JPTC.L) and L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

JPTC.L is traded in GBp, while LGGL.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the LGGL.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JPTC.L achieves a 6.12% return, which is significantly lower than LGGL.L's 9.94% return.


JPTC.L

1D
-0.68%
1M
-0.01%
YTD
6.12%
6M
6.03%
1Y
20.73%
3Y*
15.62%
5Y*
11.04%
10Y*

LGGL.L

1D
-0.55%
1M
0.47%
YTD
9.94%
6M
9.99%
1Y
26.44%
3Y*
18.29%
5Y*
12.47%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
JPTC.L
JPMorgan Carbon Transition Global Equity UCITS ETF USD (acc)
6.12%11.44%19.60%16.91%-8.74%25.32%1.92%
LGGL.L
L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF
9.94%12.55%21.28%18.77%-8.29%23.09%3.95%

Correlation

The correlation between JPTC.L and LGGL.L is 0.88, 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

0.88

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.85

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2020

0.87

The correlation between JPTC.L and LGGL.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

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


Sectors
JPTC.L
LGGL.L

Technology

29.7%
31.5%

Financial Services

16.0%
15.2%

Consumer Cyclical

11.3%
9.4%

Industrials

10.5%
10.5%

Communication Services

9.8%
9.2%

Healthcare

8.9%
8.6%

Consumer Defensive

3.8%
4.9%

Basic Materials

3.5%
3.2%

Utilities

2.8%
2.3%

Energy

2.0%
3.6%

Real Estate

1.8%
1.7%

Technology

JPTC.L
29.7%
LGGL.L
31.5%

Financial Services

JPTC.L
16.0%
LGGL.L
15.2%

Consumer Cyclical

JPTC.L
11.3%
LGGL.L
9.4%

Industrials

JPTC.L
10.5%
LGGL.L
10.5%

Communication Services

JPTC.L
9.8%
LGGL.L
9.2%

Healthcare

JPTC.L
8.9%
LGGL.L
8.6%

Consumer Defensive

JPTC.L
3.8%
LGGL.L
4.9%

Basic Materials

JPTC.L
3.5%
LGGL.L
3.2%

Utilities

JPTC.L
2.8%
LGGL.L
2.3%

Energy

JPTC.L
2.0%
LGGL.L
3.6%

Real Estate

JPTC.L
1.8%
LGGL.L
1.7%

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

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

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

JPTC.L

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.


LGGL.L
LGGL.L Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
LGGL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LGGL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
LGGL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
LGGL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
LGGL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan Carbon Transition Global Equity UCITS ETF USD (acc) (JPTC.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.


JPTC.LLGGL.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.41

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.37

3.99

-1.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.66

14.61

-4.95

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

The current JPTC.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is comparable to the LGGL.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JPTC.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

JPTC.L vs. LGGL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JPTC.L drawdown since its inception was -19.17%, smaller than the maximum LGGL.L drawdown of -25.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JPTC.L and LGGL.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JPTC.LLGGL.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.17%

-25.97%

+6.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.69%

-6.59%

-2.10%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.17%

-19.24%

+0.07%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.17%

-19.24%

+0.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.56%

-1.31%

-0.25%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.97%

-3.27%

+0.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.14%

1.81%

+0.33%

Volatility

JPTC.L vs. LGGL.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for JPMorgan Carbon Transition Global Equity UCITS ETF USD (acc) (JPTC.L) is 3.53%, while L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGL.L) has a volatility of 3.86%. This indicates that JPTC.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LGGL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


JPTC.LLGGL.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.53%

3.86%

-0.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.73%

9.42%

-0.69%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.31%

11.95%

-0.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.53%

14.52%

-0.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.29%

16.26%

-2.97%

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

JPTC.L has a 0.19% 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

JPTC.L vs. LGGL.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


JPTC.L and LGGL.L have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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.

LGGL.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for JPTC.L.

JPTC.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while LGGL.L tracks Solactive Core Developed Markets Large & Mid Cap USD Index NTR. They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and L&G. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for JPTC.L and 0.10% for LGGL.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for JPTC.L and LGGL.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