LGAG.L vs. EPRA.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

LGAG.L (L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF) and EPRA.L (Amundi Index FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global UCITS ETF DR) are both exchange-traded funds - LGAG.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD, while EPRA.L is a REIT fund tracking the FTSE EPRA Nareit Global TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LGAG.L returned 6.03%/yr vs 2.14%/yr for EPRA.L. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.10% expense ratio.

Performance

LGAG.L vs. EPRA.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 Amundi Index FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global UCITS ETF DR (EPRA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LGAG.L achieves a 9.68% return, which is significantly lower than EPRA.L's 12.99% return.

LGAG.L

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: -0.57%
• 6M: 6.15%
• YTD: 9.68%
• 1Y: 13.66%
• 3Y*: 11.12%
• 5Y*: 6.03%
• 10Y*: —

EPRA.L

• 1D: 1.09%
• 1M: 3.52%
• 6M: 9.11%
• YTD: 12.99%
• 1Y: 17.63%
• 3Y*: 8.73%
• 5Y*: 2.14%
• 10Y*: —

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

LGAG.L vs. EPRA.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	9.68%	12.56%	6.20%	-0.81%	5.61%	4.15%	4.80%	14.08%	-22.77%
EPRA.L Amundi Index FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global UCITS ETF DR	12.99%	3.12%	1.31%	4.40%	-16.02%	27.84%	-11.99%	17.30%	-1.83%

Correlation

The correlation between LGAG.L and EPRA.L is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.47
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2018	0.54

The correlation between LGAG.L and EPRA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (1 year) to 0.54 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LGAG.L vs. EPRA.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: 43
LGAG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
LGAG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
LGAG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 41
LGAG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
LGAG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 40

EPRA.L

EPRA.L Risk / Return Rank: 57
EPRA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
EPRA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
EPRA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 58
EPRA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
EPRA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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. EPRA.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 Amundi Index FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global UCITS ETF DR (EPRA.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	EPRA.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.19	1.61	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.79	2.33	-0.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.28	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.88	1.96	-0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.93	6.68	-1.75

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

The current LGAG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is comparable to the EPRA.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGAG.L and EPRA.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.

Drawdowns

LGAG.L vs. EPRA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGAG.L drawdown since its inception was -35.16%, roughly equal to the maximum EPRA.L drawdown of -35.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGAG.L and EPRA.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	LGAG.L	EPRA.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.16%	-35.65%	+0.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.24%	-8.95%	+1.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.32%	-17.01%	-4.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.32%	-26.59%	+5.27%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.29%	0.00%	-2.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.23%	-11.80%	+2.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.77%	2.63%	+0.14%

Volatility

LGAG.L vs. EPRA.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF (LGAG.L) is 2.65%, while Amundi Index FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global UCITS ETF DR (EPRA.L) has a volatility of 3.67%. This indicates that LGAG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EPRA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LGAG.L	EPRA.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.65%	3.67%	-1.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.17%	8.89%	+0.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.51%	10.91%	+0.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.44%	13.84%	+5.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.08%	15.68%	+5.40%

LGAG.L vs. EPRA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both LGAG.L and EPRA.L have an expense ratio of 0.10%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

LGAG.L vs. EPRA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither LGAG.L nor EPRA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LGAG.L and EPRA.L in my portfolio?

LGAG.L and EPRA.L have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LGAG.L or EPRA.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.10% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LGAG.L or EPRA.L?

LGAG.L and EPRA.L have the same expense ratio: 0.10% per year.

What is the main difference between LGAG.L and EPRA.L?

LGAG.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while EPRA.L is REIT. LGAG.L tracks MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD, while EPRA.L tracks FTSE EPRA Nareit Global TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and Amundi.