LUK2.L vs. RTWO.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

LUK2.L (L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF) and RTWO.L (L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - LUK2.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF, while RTWO.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LUK2.L returned 10.28%/yr vs 10.92%/yr for RTWO.L. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LUK2.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for RTWO.L.

Performance

LUK2.L vs. RTWO.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 Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

LUK2.L is traded in GBp, while RTWO.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the RTWO.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 lower than RTWO.L's 19.61% return. Over the past 10 years, LUK2.L has underperformed RTWO.L with an annualized return of 10.28%, while RTWO.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.92% 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%

RTWO.L

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 0.28%
• 6M: 13.68%
• YTD: 19.61%
• 1Y: 31.90%
• 3Y*: 15.08%
• 5Y*: 8.88%
• 10Y*: 10.92%

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

LUK2.L vs. RTWO.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%
RTWO.L L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc	19.61%	3.40%	11.14%	14.05%	-9.01%	20.34%	16.30%	19.76%	-6.99%	4.10%

Correlation

The correlation between LUK2.L and RTWO.L is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.48
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2009	0.58

The correlation between LUK2.L and RTWO.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (1 year) to 0.58 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LUK2.L vs. RTWO.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

RTWO.L

RTWO.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
RTWO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
RTWO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 69
RTWO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
RTWO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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. RTWO.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 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.

	LUK2.L	RTWO.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.51	1.87	-0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	2.64	-0.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.32	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.84	4.18	-2.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.39	12.53	-7.14

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

The current LUK2.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is comparable to the RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LUK2.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.

Drawdowns

LUK2.L vs. RTWO.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LUK2.L drawdown since its inception was -58.84%, which is greater than RTWO.L's maximum drawdown of -45.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LUK2.L and RTWO.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	LUK2.L	RTWO.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.84%	-45.27%	-13.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.55%	-7.59%	-10.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.42%	-28.40%	+2.98%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.42%	-28.40%	+2.98%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-58.84%	-35.32%	-23.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.09%	-3.14%	-4.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.68%	-8.28%	-2.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.34%	2.54%	+3.80%

Volatility

LUK2.L vs. RTWO.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF (LUK2.L) has a higher volatility of 6.11% compared to L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L) at 4.93%. This indicates that LUK2.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.

Volatility by Period

	LUK2.L	RTWO.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.11%	4.93%	+1.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.64%	12.92%	+6.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.61%	16.98%	+5.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.61%	20.15%	+5.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.65%	20.99%	+8.66%

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

LUK2.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than RTWO.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

LUK2.L vs. RTWO.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

LUK2.L and RTWO.L have a correlation of 0.42, 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 RTWO.L?

On fees, RTWO.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

RTWO.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for LUK2.L.

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

LUK2.L is categorized as Technology Equities, while RTWO.L is Small Cap Blend Equities. LUK2.L tracks L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF, while RTWO.L tracks Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for LUK2.L and 0.30% for RTWO.L.