PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LDEM.L vs. RTWO.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LDEM.L vs. RTWO.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis (LDEM.L) and L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LDEM.L achieves a 11.68% return, which is significantly lower than RTWO.L's 20.10% return.


LDEM.L

1D
-1.32%
1M
-4.20%
6M
8.15%
YTD
11.68%
1Y
23.20%
3Y*
17.43%
5Y*
9.59%
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%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LDEM.L vs. RTWO.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
LDEM.L
L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis
11.68%25.93%9.54%17.25%-11.95%0.39%
RTWO.L
L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc
20.10%11.33%9.23%20.05%-18.68%2.00%

Correlation

The correlation between LDEM.L and RTWO.L is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.53

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

0.52

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

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 13, 2021

0.55

The correlation between LDEM.L and RTWO.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

LDEM.L vs. RTWO.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LDEM.L
LDEM.L Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
LDEM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LDEM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
LDEM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
LDEM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
LDEM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

RTWO.L
RTWO.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

LDEM.L vs. RTWO.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis (LDEM.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.


LDEM.LRTWO.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.28

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.33

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.67

3.65

-0.98

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.52

12.05

-3.53

LDEM.L vs. RTWO.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LDEM.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is comparable to the RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LDEM.L and RTWO.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

LDEM.L vs. RTWO.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LDEM.L drawdown since its inception was -25.82%, smaller than the maximum RTWO.L drawdown of -53.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LDEM.L and RTWO.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LDEM.LRTWO.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.82%

-53.86%

+28.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.70%

-9.08%

+0.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.16%

-26.96%

+9.80%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.82%

-29.71%

+3.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.01%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.73%

-1.25%

-3.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.44%

-9.95%

+3.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.73%

2.76%

-0.03%

Volatility

LDEM.L vs. RTWO.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis (LDEM.L) has a higher volatility of 4.70% compared to L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L) at 4.39%. This indicates that LDEM.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


LDEM.LRTWO.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.70%

4.39%

+0.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.94%

12.94%

-1.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.08%

17.25%

-3.17%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.53%

21.05%

-6.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.52%

21.37%

-6.85%

LDEM.L vs. RTWO.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LDEM.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than RTWO.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

LDEM.L vs. RTWO.L - Dividend Comparison

LDEM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.35%, while RTWO.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
LDEM.L
L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis
3.35%3.59%3.85%3.74%5.33%1.41%
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


LDEM.L and RTWO.L have a correlation of 0.53, 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 0.45% for LDEM.L.

LDEM.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while RTWO.L is Small Cap Blend Equities. LDEM.L tracks L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis, while RTWO.L tracks Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for LDEM.L and 0.30% for RTWO.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LDEM.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