PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF (LGAG.L) and SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
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

40.9%
13.2%

Basic Materials

16.7%
3.3%

Industrials

9.1%
6.5%

Real Estate

8.5%
0.6%

Consumer Cyclical

6.5%
9.6%

Healthcare

3.9%
2.8%

Communication Services

3.6%
6.1%

Consumer Defensive

3.1%
2.1%

Energy

3.1%
2.4%

Utilities

2.7%
1.3%

Technology

1.9%
52.1%

Financial Services

LGAG.L
40.9%
EMAS.L
13.2%

Basic Materials

LGAG.L
16.7%
EMAS.L
3.3%

Industrials

LGAG.L
9.1%
EMAS.L
6.5%

Real Estate

LGAG.L
8.5%
EMAS.L
0.6%

Consumer Cyclical

LGAG.L
6.5%
EMAS.L
9.6%

Healthcare

LGAG.L
3.9%
EMAS.L
2.8%

Communication Services

LGAG.L
3.6%
EMAS.L
6.1%

Consumer Defensive

LGAG.L
3.1%
EMAS.L
2.1%

Energy

LGAG.L
3.1%
EMAS.L
2.4%

Utilities

LGAG.L
2.7%
EMAS.L
1.3%

Technology

LGAG.L
1.9%
EMAS.L
52.1%

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

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

LGAG.L
LGAG.L Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
LGAG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LGAG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
LGAG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
LGAG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
LGAG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank

EMAS.L
EMAS.L Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
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.

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.LEMAS.LDifference
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

LGAG.L vs. EMAS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LGAG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is lower than the EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGAG.L and EMAS.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

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.LEMAS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.50%

0.00%

-3.50%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.28%

-22.16%

+12.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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.LEMAS.LDifference

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.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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