LDAP.L vs. RTWO.L
LDAP.L (L&G APAC ex-Japan Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis) and RTWO.L (L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - LDAP.L is a Japan Equities fund tracking the L&G APAC ex-Japan Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis, while RTWO.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LDAP.L returned 9.64%/yr vs 8.50%/yr for RTWO.L. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LDAP.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for RTWO.L.
Performance
LDAP.L vs. RTWO.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LDAP.L achieves a 17.12% return, which is significantly lower than RTWO.L's 20.10% return.
LDAP.L
- 1D
- 1.71%
- 1M
- -1.56%
- 6M
- 15.58%
- YTD
- 17.12%
- 1Y
- 24.38%
- 3Y*
- 20.08%
- 5Y*
- 9.64%
- 10Y*
- —
RTWO.L
- 1D
- 0.57%
- 1M
- 1.17%
- 6M
- 14.38%
- YTD
- 20.10%
- 1Y
- 33.31%
- 3Y*
- 16.35%
- 5Y*
- 8.50%
- 10Y*
- 11.21%
LDAP.L vs. RTWO.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LDAP.L L&G APAC ex-Japan Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis | 17.12% | 35.59% | 3.81% | 9.13% | -8.93% | -99.00% |
RTWO.L L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc | 20.10% | 11.33% | 9.23% | 20.05% | -18.68% | 4.55% |
Correlation
The correlation between LDAP.L and RTWO.L is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2021 | 0.60 |
The correlation between LDAP.L and RTWO.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.48 (1 year) to 0.60 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
LDAP.L vs. RTWO.L — Risk / Return Rank
LDAP.L
RTWO.L
LDAP.L vs. RTWO.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G APAC ex-Japan Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis (LDAP.L) and L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.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.
| LDAP.L | RTWO.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.34 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.33 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.31 | 3.65 | -1.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.22 | 12.05 | -5.83 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LDAP.L vs. RTWO.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LDAP.L drawdown since its inception was -99.33%, which is greater than RTWO.L's maximum drawdown of -53.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LDAP.L and RTWO.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LDAP.L | RTWO.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.33% | -53.86% | -45.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.85% | -9.08% | -1.77% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.47% | -26.96% | +2.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -34.61% | -29.71% | -4.90% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -42.01% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -98.38% | -1.25% | -97.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -98.71% | -9.95% | -88.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.04% | 2.76% | +1.28% |
Volatility
LDAP.L vs. RTWO.L - Volatility Comparison
L&G APAC ex-Japan Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis (LDAP.L) has a higher volatility of 4.91% compared to L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L) at 4.39%. This indicates that LDAP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RTWO.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LDAP.L | RTWO.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.91% | 4.39% | +0.52% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.37% | 12.94% | +0.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.84% | 17.25% | -1.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.07% | 21.05% | +7.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 51.15% | 21.37% | +29.78% |
LDAP.L vs. RTWO.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
LDAP.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than RTWO.L's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
LDAP.L vs. RTWO.L - Dividend Comparison
LDAP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.83%, while RTWO.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LDAP.L L&G APAC ex-Japan Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis | 3.83% | 4.23% | 4.86% | 5.25% | 4.92% | 2.23% |
RTWO.L L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LDAP.L and RTWO.L have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RTWO.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RTWO.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for LDAP.L.
LDAP.L is categorized as Japan Equities, while RTWO.L is Small Cap Blend Equities. LDAP.L tracks L&G APAC ex-Japan Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis, while RTWO.L tracks Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for LDAP.L and 0.30% for RTWO.L.
Find the right allocation for LDAP.L and RTWO.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