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

Performance

RTWP.L vs. LGUK.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 UK Equity UCITS ETF (LGUK.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 LGUK.L's 3.73% 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%

LGUK.L

1D
-1.06%
1M
-0.31%
YTD
3.73%
6M
8.03%
1Y
17.97%
3Y*
13.62%
5Y*
11.33%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
RTWP.L
L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF
16.93%3.61%11.18%13.44%-8.94%20.68%15.78%20.59%-10.41%
LGUK.L
L&G UK Equity UCITS ETF
3.73%24.95%10.56%6.64%5.26%17.94%-12.15%20.11%-7.13%

Correlation

The correlation between RTWP.L and LGUK.L is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.32

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

0.38

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

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 14, 2018

0.54

Over the past year, the correlation between RTWP.L and LGUK.L has dropped to 0.32 - well below their long-term average of 0.54, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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


Sectors
RTWP.L
LGUK.L

Technology

20.0%
0.7%

Industrials

17.9%
14.7%

Financial Services

15.3%
25.3%

Healthcare

14.5%
14.7%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%
3.7%

Real Estate

5.9%
0.6%

Energy

5.3%
12.1%

Basic Materials

4.6%
5.9%

Utilities

2.8%
5.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.7%
14.5%

Communication Services

2.4%
2.5%

Technology

RTWP.L
20.0%
LGUK.L
0.7%

Industrials

RTWP.L
17.9%
LGUK.L
14.7%

Financial Services

RTWP.L
15.3%
LGUK.L
25.3%

Healthcare

RTWP.L
14.5%
LGUK.L
14.7%

Consumer Cyclical

RTWP.L
8.6%
LGUK.L
3.7%

Real Estate

RTWP.L
5.9%
LGUK.L
0.6%

Energy

RTWP.L
5.3%
LGUK.L
12.1%

Basic Materials

RTWP.L
4.6%
LGUK.L
5.9%

Utilities

RTWP.L
2.8%
LGUK.L
5.5%

Consumer Defensive

RTWP.L
2.7%
LGUK.L
14.5%

Communication Services

RTWP.L
2.4%
LGUK.L
2.5%

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. LGUK.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

LGUK.L
LGUK.L Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
LGUK.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LGUK.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
LGUK.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
LGUK.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
LGUK.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.

RTWP.L vs. LGUK.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 UK Equity UCITS ETF (LGUK.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.LLGUK.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.24

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.93

1.92

+3.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.84

6.51

+8.33

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

The current RTWP.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is higher than the LGUK.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTWP.L and LGUK.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.LLGUK.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.34

1.24

+1.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

0.82

-0.38

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

0.52

+0.17

Drawdowns

RTWP.L vs. LGUK.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RTWP.L drawdown since its inception was -35.32%, roughly equal to the maximum LGUK.L drawdown of -33.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTWP.L and LGUK.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RTWP.LLGUK.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.32%

-33.76%

-1.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.40%

-9.30%

+1.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.77%

-12.30%

-16.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.77%

-12.30%

-16.47%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-5.71%

+5.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.05%

-4.82%

-2.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.46%

2.75%

-0.29%

Volatility

RTWP.L vs. LGUK.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.L) has a higher volatility of 4.55% compared to L&G UK Equity UCITS ETF (LGUK.L) at 4.30%. This indicates that RTWP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LGUK.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RTWP.LLGUK.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.55%

4.30%

+0.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.96%

12.53%

-1.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.61%

14.42%

+1.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.25%

13.86%

+5.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.40%

16.31%

+4.09%

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

RTWP.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than LGUK.L's 0.05% expense ratio.


Dividends

RTWP.L vs. LGUK.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither RTWP.L nor LGUK.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


RTWP.L and LGUK.L have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, LGUK.L is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LGUK.L is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for RTWP.L.

RTWP.L is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while LGUK.L is Europe Equities. RTWP.L tracks Russell 2000 TR USD, while LGUK.L tracks FTSE AllSh TR GBP. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for RTWP.L and 0.05% for LGUK.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RTWP.L and LGUK.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