RENW.L vs. LDGL.L
RENW.L (L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF) and LDGL.L (L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing) are both exchange-traded funds - RENW.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF, while LDGL.L is a Global Equity Income fund tracking the FTSE Developed All Cap Dividend Growth with Quality Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RENW.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for LDGL.L.
Performance
RENW.L vs. LDGL.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
RENW.L
- 1D
- -1.20%
- 1M
- -8.42%
- 6M
- 17.61%
- YTD
- 23.89%
- 1Y
- 47.17%
- 3Y*
- 14.14%
- 5Y*
- 5.60%
- 10Y*
- —
LDGL.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.54%
- 6M
- 11.10%
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RENW.L vs. LDGL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
RENW.L L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF | 19.77% |
LDGL.L L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing | 12.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between RENW.L and LDGL.L is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2026 | 0.63 |
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
RENW.L vs. LDGL.L — Risk / Return Rank
RENW.L
LDGL.L
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
RENW.L vs. LDGL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENW.L) and L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing (LDGL.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.
| RENW.L | LDGL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.07 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.60 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RENW.L vs. LDGL.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RENW.L drawdown since its inception was -48.58%, which is greater than LDGL.L's maximum drawdown of -9.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RENW.L and LDGL.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RENW.L | LDGL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.58% | -9.46% | -39.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.66% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -32.48% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -43.77% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.34% | 0.00% | -15.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.62% | -2.37% | -21.25% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.54% | — | — |
Volatility
RENW.L vs. LDGL.L - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RENW.L | LDGL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.94% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.76% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.93% | 14.29% | +11.64% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.75% | 14.29% | +10.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.98% | 14.29% | +10.69% |
RENW.L vs. LDGL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
RENW.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than LDGL.L's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
RENW.L vs. LDGL.L - Dividend Comparison
RENW.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LDGL.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%.
| Position | TTM |
|---|---|
LDGL.L L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing | 1.60% |
RENW.L L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RENW.L and LDGL.L have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LDGL.L is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LDGL.L is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for RENW.L.
RENW.L is categorized as Global Equities, while LDGL.L is Global Equity Income. RENW.L tracks L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF, while LDGL.L tracks FTSE Developed All Cap Dividend Growth with Quality Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for RENW.L and 0.29% for LDGL.L.
Find the right allocation for RENW.L and LDGL.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