PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.L) and L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF (LDAG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RTWP.L achieves a 16.93% return, which is significantly higher than LDAG.L's 15.96% return.


RTWP.L

1D
1.41%
1M
4.16%
YTD
16.93%
6M
15.64%
1Y
36.63%
3Y*
14.81%
5Y*
8.43%
10Y*
12.05%

LDAG.L

1D
-1.55%
1M
0.03%
YTD
15.96%
6M
14.78%
1Y
37.27%
3Y*
17.83%
5Y*
9.96%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
RTWP.L
L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF
16.93%3.61%11.18%13.44%-8.94%5.91%
LDAG.L
L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF
15.96%26.41%5.50%3.28%1.73%-0.75%

Correlation

The correlation between RTWP.L and LDAG.L is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.42

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.48

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.50

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2021

0.50

RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RTWP.L
LDAG.L

Technology

20.0%
6.5%

Industrials

17.9%
12.3%

Financial Services

15.3%
34.9%

Healthcare

14.5%
2.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%
11.1%

Real Estate

5.9%
0.3%

Energy

5.3%
3.7%

Basic Materials

4.6%
5.8%

Utilities

2.8%
11.6%

Consumer Defensive

2.7%
7.1%

Communication Services

2.4%
4.3%

Technology

RTWP.L
20.0%
LDAG.L
6.5%

Industrials

RTWP.L
17.9%
LDAG.L
12.3%

Financial Services

RTWP.L
15.3%
LDAG.L
34.9%

Healthcare

RTWP.L
14.5%
LDAG.L
2.8%

Consumer Cyclical

RTWP.L
8.6%
LDAG.L
11.1%

Real Estate

RTWP.L
5.9%
LDAG.L
0.3%

Energy

RTWP.L
5.3%
LDAG.L
3.7%

Basic Materials

RTWP.L
4.6%
LDAG.L
5.8%

Utilities

RTWP.L
2.8%
LDAG.L
11.6%

Consumer Defensive

RTWP.L
2.7%
LDAG.L
7.1%

Communication Services

RTWP.L
2.4%
LDAG.L
4.3%

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

RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

RTWP.L
RTWP.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
RTWP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank

LDAG.L
LDAG.L Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
LDAG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LDAG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
LDAG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
LDAG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
LDAG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
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.

RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.L) and L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF (LDAG.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.


RTWP.LLDAG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.39

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.47

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.93

3.87

+1.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.84

10.60

+4.23

RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTWP.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is comparable to the LDAG.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTWP.L and LDAG.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RTWP.LLDAG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.34

2.72

-0.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

0.77

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.59

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.70

0.76

-0.06

Drawdowns

RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RTWP.L drawdown since its inception was -35.32%, which is greater than LDAG.L's maximum drawdown of -14.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTWP.L and LDAG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RTWP.LLDAG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.32%

-14.68%

-20.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.40%

-9.58%

+2.18%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.77%

-14.68%

-14.09%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.77%

-14.68%

-14.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-3.00%

+3.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.05%

-4.33%

-2.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.46%

3.51%

-1.05%

Volatility

RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.L) and L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF (LDAG.L) have volatilities of 4.55% and 4.72%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RTWP.LLDAG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.55%

4.72%

-0.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.96%

10.47%

+0.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.61%

13.75%

+1.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.25%

12.90%

+6.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.40%

12.90%

+7.50%

RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

RTWP.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than LDAG.L's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

RTWP.L vs. LDAG.L - Dividend Comparison

RTWP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LDAG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.78%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
LDAG.L
L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF
3.78%4.23%4.75%5.40%4.80%2.19%
RTWP.L
L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RTWP.L and LDAG.L have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

RTWP.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for LDAG.L.

RTWP.L is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while LDAG.L is Asia Pacific Equities. RTWP.L tracks Russell 2000 TR USD, while LDAG.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Pac Ex JPN NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for RTWP.L and 0.40% for LDAG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RTWP.L and LDAG.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