LDAG.L vs. C500.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

LDAG.L (L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF) and C500.L (Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - LDAG.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Pac Ex JPN NR USD, while C500.L is a China Equities fund tracking the S&P China A MidCap 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LDAG.L returned 18.27%/yr vs 2.65%/yr for C500.L. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LDAG.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for C500.L.

Performance

LDAG.L vs. C500.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF (LDAG.L) and Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C500.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

LDAG.L is traded in GBp, while C500.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the C500.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LDAG.L achieves a 15.54% return, which is significantly higher than C500.L's 0.64% return.

LDAG.L

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: -3.06%
• 6M: 13.97%
• YTD: 15.54%
• 1Y: 22.13%
• 3Y*: 18.27%
• 5Y*: 9.90%
• 10Y*: —

C500.L

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 0.16%
• 6M: 0.43%
• YTD: 0.64%
• 1Y: -0.02%
• 3Y*: 2.65%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LDAG.L vs. C500.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
LDAG.L L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF	15.54%	26.42%	5.50%	3.28%	-3.33%
C500.L Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc	0.64%	-0.64%	14.46%	-13.60%	13.41%

Correlation

The correlation between LDAG.L and C500.L is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.08
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2022	0.25

The correlation between LDAG.L and C500.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (1 year) to 0.25 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LDAG.L vs. C500.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LDAG.L

LDAG.L Risk / Return Rank: 53
LDAG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
LDAG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
LDAG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 52
LDAG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
LDAG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 44

C500.L

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

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.

LDAG.L vs. C500.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF (LDAG.L) and Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C500.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.

	LDAG.L	C500.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	0.05	+1.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.18	0.12	+2.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.01	+0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.30	0.06	+2.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.88	0.12	+5.76

LDAG.L vs. C500.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LDAG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is higher than the C500.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LDAG.L and C500.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

LDAG.L vs. C500.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LDAG.L drawdown since its inception was -33.08%, smaller than the maximum C500.L drawdown of -38.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LDAG.L and C500.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	LDAG.L	C500.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.08%	-38.52%	+5.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.58%	-5.98%	-3.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.89%	-26.03%	+6.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.89%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.35%	-13.89%	+10.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.63%	-15.85%	-3.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.75%	2.70%	+1.05%

Volatility

LDAG.L vs. C500.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF (LDAG.L) has a higher volatility of 3.90% compared to Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C500.L) at 1.73%. This indicates that LDAG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than C500.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LDAG.L	C500.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.90%	1.73%	+2.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.34%	5.00%	+6.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.07%	6.58%	+7.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.86%	22.87%	-3.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.59%	22.87%	-0.28%

LDAG.L vs. C500.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LDAG.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than C500.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

LDAG.L vs. C500.L - Dividend Comparison

LDAG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.90%, while C500.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
C500.L Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LDAG.L L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF	3.90%	4.23%	4.75%	5.40%	4.80%	2.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LDAG.L and C500.L in my portfolio?

LDAG.L and C500.L have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LDAG.L or C500.L?

On fees, C500.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LDAG.L or C500.L?

C500.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for LDAG.L.

What is the main difference between LDAG.L and C500.L?

LDAG.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while C500.L is China Equities. LDAG.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Pac Ex JPN NR USD, while C500.L tracks S&P China A MidCap 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for LDAG.L and 0.35% for C500.L.