PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LDME.L vs. ISPY.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LDME.L vs. ISPY.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 (LDME.L) and L&G Cyber Security UCITS ETF (ISPY.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LDME.L achieves a 11.94% return, which is significantly lower than ISPY.L's 47.11% return.


LDME.L

1D
-0.95%
1M
-4.00%
6M
8.40%
YTD
11.94%
1Y
21.67%
3Y*
16.11%
5Y*
9.82%
10Y*

ISPY.L

1D
-2.96%
1M
11.14%
6M
50.18%
YTD
47.11%
1Y
44.59%
3Y*
28.79%
5Y*
13.16%
10Y*
17.12%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LDME.L vs. ISPY.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
LDME.L
L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis
11.94%16.54%11.33%10.64%-2.34%7,358.59%
ISPY.L
L&G Cyber Security UCITS ETF
47.11%0.28%19.68%34.35%-24.57%2.26%

Correlation

The correlation between LDME.L and ISPY.L is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.17

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

0.28

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

0.32

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

0.32

The correlation between LDME.L and ISPY.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (1 year) to 0.32 (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

LDME.L vs. ISPY.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LDME.L
LDME.L Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
LDME.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LDME.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
LDME.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
LDME.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
LDME.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

ISPY.L
ISPY.L Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
ISPY.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISPY.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISPY.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
ISPY.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISPY.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
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.

LDME.L vs. ISPY.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 (LDME.L) and L&G Cyber Security UCITS ETF (ISPY.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.


LDME.LISPY.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.30

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.53

2.18

+1.34

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.38

5.43

+3.95

LDME.L vs. ISPY.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LDME.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is comparable to the ISPY.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LDME.L and ISPY.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

LDME.L vs. ISPY.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LDME.L drawdown since its inception was -14.82%, smaller than the maximum ISPY.L drawdown of -50.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LDME.L and ISPY.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LDME.LISPY.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.82%

-50.17%

+35.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.44%

-20.33%

+13.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.82%

-28.19%

+13.37%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.82%

-31.77%

+16.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.77%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.29%

-2.96%

-2.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.24%

-12.86%

+9.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.42%

8.19%

-5.77%

Volatility

LDME.L vs. ISPY.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis (LDME.L) is 3.97%, while L&G Cyber Security UCITS ETF (ISPY.L) has a volatility of 10.58%. This indicates that LDME.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISPY.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LDME.LISPY.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.97%

10.58%

-6.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.77%

24.94%

-15.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.12%

27.86%

-15.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.65%

27.58%

-14.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3,216.41%

24.47%

+3,191.94%

LDME.L vs. ISPY.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LDME.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than ISPY.L's 0.69% expense ratio.


Dividends

LDME.L vs. ISPY.L - Dividend Comparison

LDME.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.85%, while ISPY.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
ISPY.L
L&G Cyber Security UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
LDME.L
L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis
2.85%3.04%3.67%3.56%4.57%1.55%

Frequently Asked Questions


LDME.L and ISPY.L have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, LDME.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LDME.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for ISPY.L.

LDME.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while ISPY.L is Cybersecurity. LDME.L tracks L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight ETF USD Dis, while ISPY.L tracks ISE Cyber Security UCITS Index. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for LDME.L and 0.69% for ISPY.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LDME.L and ISPY.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