RENW.L vs. RTWO.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

RENW.L (L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF) and RTWO.L (L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - RENW.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF, while RTWO.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RENW.L returned 5.60%/yr vs 8.50%/yr for RTWO.L. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RENW.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for RTWO.L.

Performance

RENW.L vs. RTWO.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENW.L) and L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RENW.L achieves a 23.89% return, which is significantly higher than RTWO.L's 20.10% return.

RENW.L

• 1D: -1.20%
• 1M: -8.42%
• 6M: 17.61%
• YTD: 23.89%
• 1Y: 47.17%
• 3Y*: 14.14%
• 5Y*: 5.60%
• 10Y*: —

RTWO.L

• 1D: 0.57%
• 1M: 1.17%
• 6M: 14.38%
• YTD: 20.10%
• 1Y: 33.31%
• 3Y*: 16.35%
• 5Y*: 8.50%
• 10Y*: 11.21%

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

RENW.L vs. RTWO.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
RENW.L L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF	23.89%	51.27%	-14.25%	-8.27%	-8.82%	-7.46%	24.52%
RTWO.L L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc	20.10%	11.33%	9.23%	20.05%	-18.68%	19.21%	14.48%

Correlation

The correlation between RENW.L and RTWO.L is 0.67, 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	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.68
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2020	0.72

The correlation between RENW.L and RTWO.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RENW.L vs. RTWO.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

RENW.L

RENW.L Risk / Return Rank: 71
RENW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
RENW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
RENW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
RENW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
RENW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 73

RTWO.L

RTWO.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
RTWO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
RTWO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 69
RTWO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
RTWO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

RENW.L vs. RTWO.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 Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.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	RTWO.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	1.92	-0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.50	2.87	-0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.33	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.07	3.65	-0.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.60	12.05	-1.45

RENW.L vs. RTWO.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RENW.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RENW.L and RTWO.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

RENW.L vs. RTWO.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RENW.L drawdown since its inception was -48.58%, smaller than the maximum RTWO.L drawdown of -53.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RENW.L and RTWO.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	RENW.L	RTWO.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.58%	-53.86%	+5.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.66%	-9.08%	-6.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.48%	-26.96%	-5.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.77%	-29.71%	-14.06%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-42.01%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.34%	-1.25%	-14.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.62%	-9.95%	-13.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.54%	2.76%	+1.78%

Volatility

RENW.L vs. RTWO.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENW.L) has a higher volatility of 8.94% compared to L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L) at 4.39%. This indicates that RENW.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RTWO.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RENW.L	RTWO.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.94%	4.39%	+4.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.76%	12.94%	+7.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.93%	17.25%	+8.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.75%	21.05%	+3.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.98%	21.37%	+3.61%

RENW.L vs. RTWO.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

RENW.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than RTWO.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

RENW.L vs. RTWO.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither RENW.L nor RTWO.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RENW.L and RTWO.L in my portfolio?

RENW.L and RTWO.L have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RENW.L or RTWO.L?

On fees, RTWO.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RENW.L or RTWO.L?

RTWO.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for RENW.L.

What is the main difference between RENW.L and RTWO.L?

RENW.L is categorized as Global Equities, while RTWO.L is Small Cap Blend Equities. RENW.L tracks L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF, while RTWO.L tracks Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for RENW.L and 0.30% for RTWO.L.