LGUS.L vs. BCOM.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

LGUS.L (L&G US Equity UCITS ETF) and BCOM.L (L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF - USD Accumulating ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LGUS.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the L&G US Equity UCITS ETF, while BCOM.L is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LGUS.L returned 12.82%/yr vs 10.51%/yr for BCOM.L. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LGUS.L charges 0.05%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for BCOM.L.

Performance

LGUS.L vs. BCOM.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G US Equity UCITS ETF (LGUS.L) and L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF - USD Accumulating ETF (BCOM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LGUS.L achieves a 10.34% return, which is significantly lower than BCOM.L's 20.90% return.

LGUS.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.20%
• 6M: 9.90%
• YTD: 10.34%
• 1Y: 21.64%
• 3Y*: 20.40%
• 5Y*: 12.82%
• 10Y*: —

BCOM.L

• 1D: 0.64%
• 1M: 2.17%
• 6M: 16.01%
• YTD: 20.90%
• 1Y: 30.69%
• 3Y*: 12.81%
• 5Y*: 10.51%
• 10Y*: —

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

LGUS.L vs. BCOM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
LGUS.L L&G US Equity UCITS ETF	10.34%	17.98%	25.09%	28.66%	-20.46%	27.91%	21.16%	30.91%	-9.25%
BCOM.L L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF - USD Accumulating ETF	20.90%	16.19%	4.43%	-7.25%	15.63%	27.35%	-2.99%	5.14%	-6.54%

Correlation

The correlation between LGUS.L and BCOM.L is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.11
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.06
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2018	0.23

The correlation between LGUS.L and BCOM.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.23 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LGUS.L vs. BCOM.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LGUS.L

LGUS.L Risk / Return Rank: 69
LGUS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
LGUS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
LGUS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 67
LGUS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
LGUS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 69

BCOM.L

BCOM.L Risk / Return Rank: 59
BCOM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
BCOM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
BCOM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
BCOM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
BCOM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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.

LGUS.L vs. BCOM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G US Equity UCITS ETF (LGUS.L) and L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF - USD Accumulating ETF (BCOM.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.

	LGUS.L	BCOM.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	1.78	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.69	2.33	+0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.32	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.59	2.10	+0.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.99	6.65	+3.33

LGUS.L vs. BCOM.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LGUS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is comparable to the BCOM.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGUS.L and BCOM.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

LGUS.L vs. BCOM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGUS.L drawdown since its inception was -34.26%, which is greater than BCOM.L's maximum drawdown of -31.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGUS.L and BCOM.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	LGUS.L	BCOM.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.26%	-31.65%	-2.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.58%	-14.33%	+5.75%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.46%	-14.33%	-5.13%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.64%	-26.27%	+0.63%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.49%	-8.29%	+7.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.30%	-11.63%	+6.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.23%	4.53%	-2.30%

Volatility

LGUS.L vs. BCOM.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G US Equity UCITS ETF (LGUS.L) is 2.86%, while L&G All Commodities UCITS ETF - USD Accumulating ETF (BCOM.L) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that LGUS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BCOM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LGUS.L	BCOM.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.86%	4.53%	-1.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.41%	14.82%	-5.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.47%	16.93%	-4.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.51%	16.81%	-0.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.10%	15.35%	+2.75%

LGUS.L vs. BCOM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LGUS.L has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than BCOM.L's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

LGUS.L vs. BCOM.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither LGUS.L nor BCOM.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LGUS.L and BCOM.L in my portfolio?

LGUS.L and BCOM.L have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LGUS.L or BCOM.L?

On fees, LGUS.L is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LGUS.L or BCOM.L?

LGUS.L is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for BCOM.L.

What is the main difference between LGUS.L and BCOM.L?

LGUS.L is categorized as Global Equities, while BCOM.L is Commodities. LGUS.L tracks L&G US Equity UCITS ETF, while BCOM.L tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for LGUS.L and 0.15% for BCOM.L.