LGGG.L vs. PACW.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LGGG.L (L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF) and PACW.L (Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income) are both Global Equities funds - LGGG.L tracks the MSCI ACWI NR USD while PACW.L tracks the Solactive GBS Global Markets Large & Mid Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, LGGG.L returned 27.26% vs 30.29% for PACW.L. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. LGGG.L charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for PACW.L.

Performance

LGGG.L vs. PACW.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.L) and Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

LGGG.L is traded in GBp, while PACW.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the PACW.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LGGG.L achieves a 10.12% return, which is significantly lower than PACW.L's 11.92% return.

LGGG.L

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 5.28%
• YTD: 10.12%
• 6M: 10.38%
• 1Y: 27.26%
• 3Y*: 17.85%
• 5Y*: 13.23%
• 10Y*: —

PACW.L

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 5.24%
• YTD: 11.92%
• 6M: 12.31%
• 1Y: 30.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LGGG.L vs. PACW.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LGGG.L L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF	10.12%	8.38%
PACW.L Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income	11.92%	9.58%

Correlation

The correlation between LGGG.L and PACW.L is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2025	0.98

The correlation between LGGG.L and PACW.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

LGGG.L vs. PACW.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LGGG.L

LGGG.L Risk / Return Rank: 82
LGGG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
LGGG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
LGGG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 85
LGGG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
LGGG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 82

PACW.L

PACW.L Risk / Return Rank: 86
PACW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PACW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
PACW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 89
PACW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
PACW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

LGGG.L vs. PACW.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.L) and Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.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.

	LGGG.L	PACW.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.67	2.89	-0.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.69	3.95	-0.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.55	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.07	4.27	-0.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.19	17.43	-1.24
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LGGG.L vs. PACW.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LGGG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is comparable to the PACW.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGGG.L and PACW.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LGGG.L	PACW.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.67	2.89	-0.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.00	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.91	1.24	-0.32

Drawdowns

LGGG.L vs. PACW.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGGG.L drawdown since its inception was -25.38%, which is greater than PACW.L's maximum drawdown of -17.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGGG.L and PACW.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	LGGG.L	PACW.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.38%	-17.68%	-7.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.67%	-7.06%	+0.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.68%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	-0.46%	+0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.21%	-3.02%	-0.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.68%	1.73%	-0.05%

Volatility

LGGG.L vs. PACW.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF (LGGG.L) is 2.47%, while Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L) has a volatility of 2.93%. This indicates that LGGG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PACW.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LGGG.L	PACW.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.47%	2.93%	-0.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.32%	7.75%	-0.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.16%	10.42%	-0.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.19%	13.91%	-0.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.09%	13.91%	+1.18%

LGGG.L vs. PACW.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LGGG.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is higher than PACW.L's 0.07% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

LGGG.L vs. PACW.L - Dividend Comparison

LGGG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PACW.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%.

Position	TTM
LGGG.L L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF	0.00%
PACW.L Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income	1.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LGGG.L and PACW.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, LGGG.L and PACW.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, LGGG.L or PACW.L?

On fees, PACW.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LGGG.L or PACW.L?

PACW.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.10% for LGGG.L.

What is the main difference between LGGG.L and PACW.L?

LGGG.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while PACW.L tracks Solactive GBS Global Markets Large & Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for LGGG.L and 0.07% for PACW.L.