QNTG.L vs. LEGR.L

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc (QNTG.L) and First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF (LEGR.L).

QNTG.L and LEGR.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. QNTG.L is a passively managed fund by VanEck that tracks the performance of the MarketVector Global Quantum Leaders Index. It was launched on May 21, 2025. LEGR.L is a passively managed fund by First Trust that tracks the performance of the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. It was launched on Apr 9, 2018. Both QNTG.L and LEGR.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

QNTG.L vs. LEGR.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc (QNTG.L) and First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF (LEGR.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

QNTG.L vs. LEGR.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QNTG.L VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc	-6.88%	18.84%
LEGR.L First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF	-0.57%	18.05%

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QNTG.L achieves a -6.88% return, which is significantly lower than LEGR.L's -0.57% return.

QNTG.L

• 1D: 4.04%
• 1M: -6.13%
• YTD: -6.88%
• 6M: -7.90%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LEGR.L

• 1D: 2.51%
• 1M: -2.21%
• YTD: -0.57%
• 6M: 6.58%
• 1Y: 19.06%
• 3Y*: 16.34%
• 5Y*: 11.02%
• 10Y*: —

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

QNTG.L vs. LEGR.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

QNTG.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than LEGR.L's 0.65% expense ratio.

LEGR.L

First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF

QNTG.L

VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc

Return for Risk

QNTG.L vs. LEGR.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LEGR.L

LEGR.L Risk / Return Rank: 70
LEGR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
LEGR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
LEGR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
LEGR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
LEGR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

QNTG.L vs. LEGR.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc (QNTG.L) and First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF (LEGR.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

	QNTG.L	LEGR.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.19	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.73	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	0.71	-0.25

Correlation

The correlation between QNTG.L and LEGR.L is 0.59, 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

QNTG.L vs. LEGR.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither QNTG.L nor LEGR.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

QNTG.L vs. LEGR.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QNTG.L drawdown since its inception was -23.25%, smaller than the maximum LEGR.L drawdown of -26.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QNTG.L and LEGR.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	QNTG.L	LEGR.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.25%	-34.70%	+11.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-11.86%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-31.56%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.84%	-6.57%	-13.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.95%	-6.75%	-1.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.75%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QNTG.L	LEGR.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.70%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	10.45%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.42%	16.07%	+11.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.42%	15.01%	+12.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.42%	17.38%	+10.04%