LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L
LGAG.L (L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF) and EMAS.L (SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - LGAG.L tracks the MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD while EMAS.L tracks the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LGAG.L returned 5.62%/yr vs 15.70%/yr for EMAS.L. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LGAG.L charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for EMAS.L.
Performance
LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
LGAG.L is traded in GBp, while EMAS.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the EMAS.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LGAG.L achieves a 8.32% return, which is significantly lower than EMAS.L's 81.22% return.
LGAG.L
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- -0.85%
- YTD
- 8.32%
- 6M
- 7.89%
- 1Y
- 16.16%
- 3Y*
- 11.04%
- 5Y*
- 5.62%
- 10Y*
- —
EMAS.L
- 1D
- 38.71%
- 1M
- 39.51%
- YTD
- 81.22%
- 6M
- 83.42%
- 1Y
- 109.31%
- 3Y*
- 35.88%
- 5Y*
- 15.70%
- 10Y*
- 15.67%
LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LGAG.L L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF | 8.32% | 12.56% | 6.20% | -0.81% | 5.61% | 4.15% | 4.80% | 14.08% | -22.77% |
EMAS.L SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF | 81.22% | 22.99% | 12.86% | 0.62% | -12.26% | -4.94% | 23.72% | 13.20% | 1.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between LGAG.L and EMAS.L is 0.55, 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 | 0.55 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.66 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2018 | 0.72 |
The correlation between LGAG.L and EMAS.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.72 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Industrials
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Technology
Financial Services
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Basic Materials
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Industrials
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Real Estate
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Consumer Cyclical
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Healthcare
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Communication Services
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Consumer Defensive
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Energy
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Utilities
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
Technology
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
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
LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L — Risk / Return Rank
LGAG.L
EMAS.L
LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF (LGAG.L) and SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.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.
| LGAG.L | EMAS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.44 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -5.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 2.09 | -0.83 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.22 | 10.86 | -8.63 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.12 | 35.46 | -29.34 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LGAG.L drawdown since its inception was -35.16%, smaller than the maximum EMAS.L drawdown of -53.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGAG.L and EMAS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LGAG.L | EMAS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.16% | -53.67% | +18.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.24% | -11.14% | +3.90% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.32% | -25.14% | +3.82% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.32% | -29.16% | +7.84% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.79% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.50% | 0.00% | -3.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.28% | -22.16% | +12.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.63% | 3.42% | -0.79% |
Volatility
LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF (LGAG.L) is 3.83%, while SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) has a volatility of 33.13%. This indicates that LGAG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMAS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LGAG.L | EMAS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.83% | 33.13% | -29.30% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.01% | 35.89% | -26.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.41% | 42.41% | -31.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.44% | 28.52% | -9.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.14% | 24.30% | -3.16% |
LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
LGAG.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than EMAS.L's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither LGAG.L nor EMAS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
LGAG.L and EMAS.L have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LGAG.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LGAG.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMAS.L.
LGAG.L tracks MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD, while EMAS.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for LGAG.L and 0.55% for EMAS.L.
Find the right allocation for LGAG.L and EMAS.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