PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Lyxor MSCI New Energy ESG Filtered (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist (NRJL.L) and Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NRJL.L achieves a 36.32% return, which is significantly higher than ACWL.L's 12.22% return.


NRJL.L

1D
-2.12%
1M
1.03%
YTD
36.32%
6M
130.93%
1Y
206.01%
3Y*
29.93%
5Y*
31.39%
10Y*

ACWL.L

1D
-0.20%
1M
3.87%
YTD
12.22%
6M
11.66%
1Y
29.49%
3Y*
17.87%
5Y*
12.34%
10Y*
13.71%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
NRJL.L
Lyxor MSCI New Energy ESG Filtered (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist
36.32%130.90%-11.57%-22.89%20.78%36.43%19.52%
ACWL.L
Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF
12.22%13.63%21.43%13.09%-8.59%20.41%4.40%

Correlation

The correlation between NRJL.L and ACWL.L is 0.65, 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

0.65

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

0.42

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

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 29, 2020

0.33

Over the past year, NRJL.L and ACWL.L have become more correlated (0.65) than their long-term average of 0.33, meaning their price movements have been converging.

NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
NRJL.L
ACWL.L

Industrials

46.9%
10.9%

Utilities

31.6%
2.6%

Basic Materials

10.9%
3.7%

Technology

10.4%
29.3%

Consumer Cyclical

0.2%
9.3%

Financial Services

0.0%
16.2%

Communication Services

0.0%
9.0%

Healthcare

0.0%
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

0.0%
5.0%

Energy

0.0%
4.2%

Real Estate

-

1.8%

Industrials

NRJL.L
46.9%
ACWL.L
10.9%

Utilities

NRJL.L
31.6%
ACWL.L
2.6%

Basic Materials

NRJL.L
10.9%
ACWL.L
3.7%

Technology

NRJL.L
10.4%
ACWL.L
29.3%

Consumer Cyclical

NRJL.L
0.2%
ACWL.L
9.3%

Financial Services

NRJL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
16.2%

Communication Services

NRJL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
9.0%

Healthcare

NRJL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

NRJL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
5.0%

Energy

NRJL.L
0.0%
ACWL.L
4.2%

Real Estate

NRJL.L

-

ACWL.L
1.8%

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

NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

NRJL.L
NRJL.L Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
NRJL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NRJL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
NRJL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
NRJL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
NRJL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWL.L
ACWL.L Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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.

NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor MSCI New Energy ESG Filtered (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist (NRJL.L) and Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.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.


NRJL.LACWL.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+6.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.46

1.58

+0.88

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

23.97

4.20

+19.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

85.38

17.39

+67.98

NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NRJL.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.85, which is comparable to the ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NRJL.L and ACWL.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NRJL.LACWL.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.85

3.01

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

1.89

-1.20

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

2.60

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.67

2.35

-1.68

Drawdowns

NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NRJL.L drawdown since its inception was -51.06%, which is greater than ACWL.L's maximum drawdown of -18.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NRJL.L and ACWL.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NRJL.LACWL.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-51.06%

-18.15%

-32.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.51%

-7.06%

-1.45%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-40.78%

-18.15%

-22.63%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-51.06%

-18.15%

-32.91%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.51%

-0.22%

-2.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.13%

-2.43%

-19.70%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.39%

1.71%

+0.68%

Volatility

NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor MSCI New Energy ESG Filtered (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist (NRJL.L) has a higher volatility of 7.66% compared to Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L) at 2.63%. This indicates that NRJL.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NRJL.LACWL.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.66%

2.63%

+5.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

54.66%

6.99%

+47.67%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

71.66%

9.84%

+61.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

45.42%

16.52%

+28.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

43.84%

23.32%

+20.52%

NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

NRJL.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWL.L's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

NRJL.L vs. ACWL.L - Dividend Comparison

NRJL.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 30.86%, while ACWL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
ACWL.L
Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
NRJL.L
Lyxor MSCI New Energy ESG Filtered (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist
30.86%42.07%0.73%0.77%23.99%31.56%

Frequently Asked Questions


NRJL.L and ACWL.L have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ACWL.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ACWL.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for NRJL.L.

NRJL.L is categorized as Energy Equities, while ACWL.L is Global Equities. NRJL.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD, while ACWL.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for NRJL.L and 0.45% for ACWL.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NRJL.L and ACWL.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