PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in 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). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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

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

RTWO.L
RTWO.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTWO.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank

LUK2.L
LUK2.L Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
LUK2.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LUK2.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
LUK2.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
LUK2.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
LUK2.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
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.

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.LLUK2.LDifference
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

RTWO.L vs. LUK2.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTWO.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is comparable to the LUK2.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTWO.L and LUK2.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...

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.LLUK2.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.25%

-7.31%

+6.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.95%

-13.04%

+3.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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.LLUK2.LDifference

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.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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