LUK2.L vs. AUCO.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

LUK2.L (L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF) and AUCO.L (L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LUK2.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF, while AUCO.L is a Gold fund tracking the STOXX Global Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LUK2.L returned 10.28%/yr vs 11.70%/yr for AUCO.L. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LUK2.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for AUCO.L.

Performance

LUK2.L vs. AUCO.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF (LUK2.L) and L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

LUK2.L is traded in GBp, while AUCO.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the AUCO.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LUK2.L achieves a 10.52% return, which is significantly higher than AUCO.L's -15.05% return. Over the past 10 years, LUK2.L has underperformed AUCO.L with an annualized return of 10.28%, while AUCO.L has yielded a comparatively higher 11.70% annualized return.

LUK2.L

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: 0.70%
• 6M: 5.28%
• YTD: 10.52%
• 1Y: 34.49%
• 3Y*: 23.66%
• 5Y*: 16.82%
• 10Y*: 10.28%

AUCO.L

• 1D: -3.99%
• 1M: -15.23%
• 6M: -23.89%
• YTD: -15.05%
• 1Y: 46.48%
• 3Y*: 39.74%
• 5Y*: 22.49%
• 10Y*: 11.70%

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

LUK2.L vs. AUCO.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LUK2.L L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF	10.52%	43.73%	9.81%	6.59%	3.75%	34.76%	-30.43%	32.52%	-20.70%	22.28%
AUCO.L L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF	-15.05%	161.75%	20.02%	9.27%	-4.11%	-9.27%	18.14%	38.65%	-5.11%	0.49%

Correlation

The correlation between LUK2.L and AUCO.L is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2009	0.22

The correlation between LUK2.L and AUCO.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.22 (10 years) to 0.37 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LUK2.L vs. AUCO.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LUK2.L

LUK2.L Risk / Return Rank: 49
LUK2.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
LUK2.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
LUK2.L Omega Ratio Rank: 54
LUK2.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
LUK2.L Martin Ratio Rank: 41

AUCO.L

AUCO.L Risk / Return Rank: 30
AUCO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
AUCO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
AUCO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 31
AUCO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
AUCO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

LUK2.L vs. AUCO.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF (LUK2.L) and L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.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.

	LUK2.L	AUCO.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.51	0.97	+0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	1.48	+0.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.18	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.84	1.24	+0.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.39	2.96	+2.44

LUK2.L vs. AUCO.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LUK2.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is higher than the AUCO.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LUK2.L and AUCO.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

LUK2.L vs. AUCO.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LUK2.L drawdown since its inception was -58.84%, smaller than the maximum AUCO.L drawdown of -77.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LUK2.L and AUCO.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	LUK2.L	AUCO.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.84%	-77.54%	+18.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.55%	-37.18%	+18.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.42%	-37.18%	+11.76%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.42%	-39.29%	+13.87%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-58.84%	-45.83%	-13.01%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.09%	-36.60%	+28.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.68%	-34.38%	+23.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.34%	15.68%	-9.34%

Volatility

LUK2.L vs. AUCO.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF (LUK2.L) is 6.11%, while L&G Gold Mining UCITS ETF (AUCO.L) has a volatility of 16.14%. This indicates that LUK2.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AUCO.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LUK2.L	AUCO.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.11%	16.14%	-10.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.64%	38.38%	-18.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.61%	47.49%	-24.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.61%	36.64%	-11.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.65%	34.19%	-4.54%

LUK2.L vs. AUCO.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LUK2.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than AUCO.L's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

LUK2.L vs. AUCO.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither LUK2.L nor AUCO.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LUK2.L and AUCO.L in my portfolio?

LUK2.L and AUCO.L have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LUK2.L or AUCO.L?

On fees, LUK2.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LUK2.L or AUCO.L?

LUK2.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for AUCO.L.

What is the main difference between LUK2.L and AUCO.L?

LUK2.L is categorized as Technology Equities, while AUCO.L is Gold. LUK2.L tracks L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF, while AUCO.L tracks STOXX Global Gold Miners Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for LUK2.L and 0.55% for AUCO.L.