PIGI.L vs. EMQP.L

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about HANetf Digital Infrastructure and Connectivity UCITS ETF (PIGI.L) and EMQQ Emerging Markets Internet & Ecommerce UCITS ETF - Accumulating (EMQP.L).

PIGI.L and EMQP.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. PIGI.L is a passively managed fund by HANetf that tracks the performance of the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. It was launched on Oct 8, 2020. EMQP.L is a passively managed fund by HANetf that tracks the performance of the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. It was launched on Nov 5, 2021. Both PIGI.L and EMQP.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

PIGI.L vs. EMQP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HANetf Digital Infrastructure and Connectivity UCITS ETF (PIGI.L) and EMQQ Emerging Markets Internet & Ecommerce UCITS ETF - Accumulating (EMQP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

PIGI.L vs. EMQP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PIGI.L HANetf Digital Infrastructure and Connectivity UCITS ETF	-0.59%	12.66%
EMQP.L EMQQ Emerging Markets Internet & Ecommerce UCITS ETF - Accumulating	-17.67%	8.64%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PIGI.L achieves a -0.59% return, which is significantly higher than EMQP.L's -17.67% return.

PIGI.L

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: -4.75%
• YTD: -0.59%
• 6M: 1.91%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMQP.L

• 1D: 1.54%
• 1M: -6.44%
• YTD: -17.67%
• 6M: -26.32%
• 1Y: -15.36%
• 3Y*: -0.59%
• 5Y*: -11.88%
• 10Y*: —

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

PIGI.L vs. EMQP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

PIGI.L has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than EMQP.L's 0.86% expense ratio.

EMQP.L

EMQQ Emerging Markets Internet & Ecommerce UCITS ETF - Accumulating

PIGI.L

HANetf Digital Infrastructure and Connectivity UCITS ETF

Return for Risk

PIGI.L vs. EMQP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMQP.L

EMQP.L Risk / Return Rank: 2
EMQP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
EMQP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
EMQP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2
EMQP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
EMQP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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.

PIGI.L vs. EMQP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf Digital Infrastructure and Connectivity UCITS ETF (PIGI.L) and EMQQ Emerging Markets Internet & Ecommerce UCITS ETF - Accumulating (EMQP.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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PIGI.L	EMQP.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	-0.74	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.38	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.47	0.06	+1.41

Correlation

The correlation between PIGI.L and EMQP.L is 0.52, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

PIGI.L vs. EMQP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither PIGI.L nor EMQP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

PIGI.L vs. EMQP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PIGI.L drawdown since its inception was -6.15%, smaller than the maximum EMQP.L drawdown of -67.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PIGI.L and EMQP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	PIGI.L	EMQP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.15%	-67.77%	+61.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-28.88%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-60.96%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.07%	-56.50%	+51.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.14%	-37.88%	+36.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	10.81%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PIGI.L	EMQP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	7.16%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	14.11%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.81%	20.58%	-11.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.81%	31.46%	-22.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.81%	32.29%	-23.48%