PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LGJP.L vs. RTWO.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LGJP.L vs. RTWO.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G Japan Equity UCITS ETF (LGJP.L) and L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LGJP.L achieves a 15.08% return, which is significantly lower than RTWO.L's 20.10% return.


LGJP.L

1D
-0.68%
1M
-0.39%
6M
9.30%
YTD
15.08%
1Y
33.92%
3Y*
17.92%
5Y*
9.51%
10Y*

RTWO.L

1D
0.57%
1M
1.17%
6M
14.38%
YTD
20.10%
1Y
33.31%
3Y*
16.35%
5Y*
8.50%
10Y*
11.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LGJP.L vs. RTWO.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
LGJP.L
L&G Japan Equity UCITS ETF
15.08%25.67%8.35%20.25%-16.76%1.05%16.58%18.59%-7.06%
RTWO.L
L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc
20.10%11.33%9.23%20.05%-18.68%19.21%19.82%24.50%-14.49%

Correlation

The correlation between LGJP.L and RTWO.L is 0.59, 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

0.59

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

0.57

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

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2018

0.60

The correlation between LGJP.L and RTWO.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

LGJP.L vs. RTWO.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LGJP.L
LGJP.L Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
LGJP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LGJP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
LGJP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
LGJP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
LGJP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank

RTWO.L
RTWO.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

LGJP.L vs. RTWO.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Japan Equity UCITS ETF (LGJP.L) and L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.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.


LGJP.LRTWO.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.33

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.53

3.65

-1.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.18

12.05

-3.87

LGJP.L vs. RTWO.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LGJP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is comparable to the RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGJP.L and RTWO.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

LGJP.L vs. RTWO.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGJP.L drawdown since its inception was -32.19%, smaller than the maximum RTWO.L drawdown of -53.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGJP.L and RTWO.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LGJP.LRTWO.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.19%

-53.86%

+21.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.20%

-9.08%

-4.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.30%

-26.96%

+12.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.19%

-29.71%

-2.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.01%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.27%

-1.25%

-2.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.57%

-9.95%

+2.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.08%

2.76%

+1.32%

Volatility

LGJP.L vs. RTWO.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Japan Equity UCITS ETF (LGJP.L) has a higher volatility of 6.42% compared to L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L) at 4.39%. This indicates that LGJP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RTWO.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LGJP.LRTWO.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.42%

4.39%

+2.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.61%

12.94%

+4.67%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.09%

17.25%

+3.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.15%

21.05%

-2.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.30%

21.37%

-3.07%

LGJP.L vs. RTWO.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LGJP.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than RTWO.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

LGJP.L vs. RTWO.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither LGJP.L nor RTWO.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


LGJP.L and RTWO.L have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, LGJP.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LGJP.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for RTWO.L.

LGJP.L is categorized as Japan Equities, while RTWO.L is Small Cap Blend Equities. LGJP.L tracks L&G Japan Equity UCITS ETF, while RTWO.L tracks Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for LGJP.L and 0.30% for RTWO.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LGJP.L and RTWO.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