PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LCAL.L vs. APEX.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LCAL.L vs. APEX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Lyxor MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF - Acc (LCAL.L) and Lyxor MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan UCITS ETF - Acc (APEX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

LCAL.L is traded in GBP, while APEX.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the APEX.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with LCAL.L having a 32.38% return and APEX.L slightly lower at 30.85%.


LCAL.L

1D
-1.09%
1M
12.92%
YTD
32.38%
6M
35.00%
1Y
63.67%
3Y*
23.36%
5Y*
9.38%
10Y*

APEX.L

1D
-0.83%
1M
11.72%
YTD
30.85%
6M
33.09%
1Y
60.17%
3Y*
22.08%
5Y*
9.52%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LCAL.L vs. APEX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
LCAL.L
Lyxor MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF - Acc
32.38%24.10%13.67%0.95%-11.42%-4.08%1.59%
APEX.L
Lyxor MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan UCITS ETF - Acc
30.85%22.95%13.46%-0.31%-11.28%-1.60%-0.54%

Correlation

The correlation between LCAL.L and APEX.L is 0.93, 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

0.93

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

0.94

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

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2020

0.72

Over the past year, LCAL.L and APEX.L have become more correlated (0.93) than their long-term average of 0.72, meaning their price movements have been converging.

LCAL.L vs. APEX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LCAL.L
APEX.L

Technology

45.2%
41.6%

Financial Services

16.4%
17.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.5%
10.3%

Industrials

7.1%
8.3%

Communication Services

6.9%
6.9%

Healthcare

3.8%
3.0%

Basic Materials

3.0%
3.6%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%
2.4%

Energy

2.1%
2.7%

Real Estate

1.3%
1.7%

Utilities

1.0%
1.9%

Technology

LCAL.L
45.2%
APEX.L
41.6%

Financial Services

LCAL.L
16.4%
APEX.L
17.7%

Consumer Cyclical

LCAL.L
10.5%
APEX.L
10.3%

Industrials

LCAL.L
7.1%
APEX.L
8.3%

Communication Services

LCAL.L
6.9%
APEX.L
6.9%

Healthcare

LCAL.L
3.8%
APEX.L
3.0%

Basic Materials

LCAL.L
3.0%
APEX.L
3.6%

Consumer Defensive

LCAL.L
2.9%
APEX.L
2.4%

Energy

LCAL.L
2.1%
APEX.L
2.7%

Real Estate

LCAL.L
1.3%
APEX.L
1.7%

Utilities

LCAL.L
1.0%
APEX.L
1.9%

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

LCAL.L vs. APEX.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCAL.L
LCAL.L Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
LCAL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LCAL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
LCAL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
LCAL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
LCAL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank

APEX.L
APEX.L Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
APEX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
APEX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
APEX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
APEX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
APEX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

LCAL.L vs. APEX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF - Acc (LCAL.L) and Lyxor MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan UCITS ETF - Acc (APEX.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.


LCAL.LAPEX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.27

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.62

1.56

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.45

5.54

-0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.54

18.43

+0.11

LCAL.L vs. APEX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCAL.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.43, which is comparable to the APEX.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCAL.L and APEX.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


LCAL.LAPEX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.43

3.22

+0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

0.63

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.60

-0.10

Drawdowns

LCAL.L vs. APEX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCAL.L drawdown since its inception was -33.83%, roughly equal to the maximum APEX.L drawdown of -32.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCAL.L and APEX.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LCAL.LAPEX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.83%

-32.37%

-1.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.62%

-10.82%

-0.80%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.61%

-17.06%

-0.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.34%

-27.61%

-0.73%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.09%

-0.83%

-0.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.58%

-15.31%

+2.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.42%

3.26%

+0.16%

Volatility

LCAL.L vs. APEX.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF - Acc (LCAL.L) has a higher volatility of 8.56% compared to Lyxor MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan UCITS ETF - Acc (APEX.L) at 7.74%. This indicates that LCAL.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than APEX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LCAL.LAPEX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.56%

7.74%

+0.82%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.54%

15.81%

-0.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.47%

18.63%

-0.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.71%

18.50%

-0.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.01%

19.21%

-0.20%

LCAL.L vs. APEX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCAL.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than APEX.L's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

LCAL.L vs. APEX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither LCAL.L nor APEX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.93, LCAL.L and APEX.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.

On fees, LCAL.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LCAL.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for APEX.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for LCAL.L and 0.50% for APEX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LCAL.L and APEX.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