RENG.L vs. PMLP.L

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

RENG.L (L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF) and PMLP.L (HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF) are both Energy Equities funds - RENG.L tracks the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD while PMLP.L tracks the MSCI World/Energy NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RENG.L returned 7.13%/yr vs 19.81%/yr for PMLP.L. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RENG.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for PMLP.L.

Performance

RENG.L vs. PMLP.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 HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RENG.L achieves a 34.37% return, which is significantly higher than PMLP.L's 29.65% return.

RENG.L

• 1D: -0.44%
• 1M: -8.65%
• YTD: 34.37%
• 6M: 35.37%
• 1Y: 72.02%
• 3Y*: 15.21%
• 5Y*: 7.13%
• 10Y*: —

PMLP.L

• 1D: 1.39%
• 1M: -0.06%
• YTD: 29.65%
• 6M: 30.68%
• 1Y: 36.13%
• 3Y*: 24.56%
• 5Y*: 19.81%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
RENG.L L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF	34.37%	40.21%	-12.86%	-13.13%	2.03%	-6.20%	9.04%
PMLP.L HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF	29.65%	-1.39%	35.81%	7.60%	35.33%	34.86%	-7.07%

Correlation

The correlation between RENG.L and PMLP.L is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.15
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 27, 2020	0.28

The correlation between RENG.L and PMLP.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (1 year) to 0.29 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors	RENG.L	PMLP.L
Industrials	51.4%	-
Technology	22.1%	-
Utilities	21.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	3.0%	-
Energy	1.6%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

RENG.L vs. PMLP.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: 92
RENG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
RENG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
RENG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 89
RENG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
RENG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 94

PMLP.L

PMLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 63
PMLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
PMLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
PMLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 58
PMLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
PMLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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. PMLP.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 HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.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.

	RENG.L	PMLP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.04	1.88	+1.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.68	2.47	+1.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.31	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.81	3.32	+2.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	22.79	9.23	+13.56

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

The current RENG.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.04, which is higher than the PMLP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RENG.L and PMLP.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

RENG.L vs. PMLP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RENG.L drawdown since its inception was -45.48%, which is greater than PMLP.L's maximum drawdown of -31.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RENG.L and PMLP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	RENG.L	PMLP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.48%	-31.86%	-13.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.33%	-10.82%	-1.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.77%	-20.50%	-12.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.27%	-20.50%	-19.77%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.65%	-2.08%	-6.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.66%	-7.27%	-13.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.15%	3.90%	-0.75%

Volatility

RENG.L vs. PMLP.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENG.L) has a higher volatility of 8.56% compared to HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.L) at 6.69%. This indicates that RENG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PMLP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RENG.L	PMLP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.56%	6.69%	+1.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.70%	15.83%	+1.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.54%	19.17%	+4.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.01%	19.67%	+2.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.52%	23.20%	-0.68%

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

RENG.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than PMLP.L's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

RENG.L vs. PMLP.L - Dividend Comparison

RENG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PMLP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.80%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
PMLP.L HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF	2.80%	3.31%	3.37%	6.48%	6.12%	6.58%	4.17%
RENG.L L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RENG.L and PMLP.L in my portfolio?

RENG.L and PMLP.L have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RENG.L or PMLP.L?

On fees, PMLP.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RENG.L or PMLP.L?

PMLP.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for RENG.L.

What is the main difference between RENG.L and PMLP.L?

RENG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD, while PMLP.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and HANetf. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for RENG.L and 0.40% for PMLP.L.