RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L
RTWO.L (L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc) and LUK2.L (L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RTWO.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index, while LUK2.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RTWO.L returned 11.21%/yr vs 10.56%/yr for LUK2.L. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RTWO.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for LUK2.L.
Performance
RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
RTWO.L is traded in USD, while LUK2.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the LUK2.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RTWO.L achieves a 20.10% return, which is significantly higher than LUK2.L's 11.67% return. Over the past 10 years, RTWO.L has outperformed LUK2.L with an annualized return of 11.21%, while LUK2.L has yielded a comparatively lower 10.56% annualized return.
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%
LUK2.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 2.07%
- 6M
- 6.50%
- YTD
- 11.67%
- 1Y
- 36.66%
- 3Y*
- 25.29%
- 5Y*
- 16.55%
- 10Y*
- 10.56%
RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 19.82% | 24.50% | -12.20% | 13.96% |
LUK2.L L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF | 11.67% | 54.57% | 7.98% | 12.21% | -7.34% | 33.53% | -28.30% | 37.83% | -25.19% | 33.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between RTWO.L and LUK2.L is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2009 | 0.62 |
The correlation between RTWO.L and LUK2.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (1 year) to 0.62 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L — Risk / Return Rank
RTWO.L
LUK2.L
RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L) and L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF (LUK2.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.
| RTWO.L | LUK2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.44 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.80 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.27 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.65 | 1.90 | +1.75 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.05 | 5.41 | +6.64 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RTWO.L drawdown since its inception was -53.86%, smaller than the maximum LUK2.L drawdown of -64.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTWO.L and LUK2.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RTWO.L | LUK2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.86% | -64.37% | +10.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.08% | -18.89% | +9.81% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.96% | -25.12% | -1.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.71% | -34.17% | +4.46% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.01% | -64.37% | +22.36% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.25% | -7.31% | +6.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.95% | -13.04% | +3.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.76% | 6.64% | -3.88% |
Volatility
RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L) is 4.39%, while L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF (LUK2.L) has a volatility of 6.61%. This indicates that RTWO.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LUK2.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RTWO.L | LUK2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.39% | 6.61% | -2.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.94% | 20.96% | -8.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.25% | 24.17% | -6.92% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.05% | 28.29% | -7.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.37% | 31.33% | -9.96% |
RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
RTWO.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than LUK2.L's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither RTWO.L nor LUK2.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
RTWO.L and LUK2.L have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
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.
RTWO.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for LUK2.L.
RTWO.L is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while LUK2.L is Technology Equities. RTWO.L tracks Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index, while LUK2.L tracks L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for RTWO.L and 0.50% for LUK2.L.
Find the right allocation for RTWO.L and LUK2.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