PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RENG.L vs. GCED.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RENG.L vs. GCED.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENG.L) and Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Dist (GCED.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RENG.L achieves a 44.46% return, which is significantly higher than GCED.L's 37.75% return.


RENG.L

1D
-0.30%
1M
8.19%
YTD
44.46%
6M
43.89%
1Y
89.37%
3Y*
16.55%
5Y*
9.68%
10Y*

GCED.L

1D
-0.68%
1M
6.98%
YTD
37.75%
6M
39.27%
1Y
92.04%
3Y*
5.64%
5Y*
-3.30%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RENG.L vs. GCED.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
RENG.L
L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF
44.46%40.21%-12.86%-13.13%2.03%-4.91%
GCED.L
Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Dist
37.75%31.81%-25.26%-15.01%-22.48%-20.17%

Correlation

The correlation between RENG.L and GCED.L is 0.79, 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

0.79

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

0.83

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

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2021

0.84

The correlation between RENG.L and GCED.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

RENG.L vs. GCED.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RENG.L
GCED.L

Industrials

49.4%
48.1%

Technology

23.8%
6.8%

Utilities

22.3%
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

3.0%
10.0%

Energy

1.6%
13.0%

Basic Materials

-

3.4%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

0.9%

Financial Services

-

0.9%

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Industrials

RENG.L
49.4%
GCED.L
48.1%

Technology

RENG.L
23.8%
GCED.L
6.8%

Utilities

RENG.L
22.3%
GCED.L
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

RENG.L
3.0%
GCED.L
10.0%

Energy

RENG.L
1.6%
GCED.L
13.0%

Basic Materials

RENG.L

-

GCED.L
3.4%

Communication Services

RENG.L

-

GCED.L

-

Consumer Defensive

RENG.L

-

GCED.L
0.9%

Financial Services

RENG.L

-

GCED.L
0.9%

Healthcare

RENG.L

-

GCED.L

-

Real Estate

RENG.L

-

GCED.L

-

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

RENG.L vs. GCED.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

RENG.L
RENG.L Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
RENG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RENG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
RENG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
RENG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
RENG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

GCED.L
GCED.L Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
GCED.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GCED.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
GCED.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
GCED.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
GCED.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
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.

RENG.L vs. GCED.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENG.L) and Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Dist (GCED.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.


RENG.LGCED.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.63

1.65

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

10.06

8.32

+1.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

35.59

27.77

+7.82

RENG.L vs. GCED.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RENG.L Sharpe Ratio is 4.01, which is comparable to the GCED.L Sharpe Ratio of 4.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RENG.L and GCED.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


RENG.LGCED.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.01

4.19

-0.18

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

-0.13

+0.57

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.48

-0.23

+0.71

Drawdowns

RENG.L vs. GCED.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RENG.L drawdown since its inception was -45.48%, smaller than the maximum GCED.L drawdown of -69.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RENG.L and GCED.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RENG.LGCED.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.48%

-69.62%

+24.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.84%

-11.00%

+2.16%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-33.95%

-52.78%

+18.83%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.27%

-68.49%

+28.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.79%

-28.63%

+26.84%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.65%

-40.60%

+19.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.50%

3.30%

-0.80%

Volatility

RENG.L vs. GCED.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENG.L) is 8.17%, while Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Dist (GCED.L) has a volatility of 9.08%. This indicates that RENG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GCED.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RENG.LGCED.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.17%

9.08%

-0.91%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.75%

15.29%

+0.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.23%

21.91%

+0.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.71%

26.40%

-4.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.30%

27.03%

-4.73%

RENG.L vs. GCED.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

RENG.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than GCED.L's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

RENG.L vs. GCED.L - Dividend Comparison

RENG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GCED.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
GCED.L
Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Dist
1.51%2.09%1.43%0.68%0.09%0.20%
RENG.L
L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RENG.L and GCED.L have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, RENG.L is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

RENG.L is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCED.L.

RENG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD, while GCED.L tracks WilderHill New Energy Global Innovation Index. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for RENG.L and 0.60% for GCED.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RENG.L and GCED.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