SUK2.L vs. LUK2.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

SUK2.L (L&G FTSE 100 Super Short Strategy (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF GBP (Acc)) and LUK2.L (L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF GBP (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - SUK2.L is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the FTSE 100 Daily Super Short Strategy Index, while LUK2.L is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the FTSE 100 Daily Leveraged Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SUK2.L returned -17.07%/yr vs 10.51%/yr for LUK2.L. At a correlation of -0.98, they often move in opposite directions. SUK2.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for LUK2.L.

Performance

SUK2.L vs. LUK2.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G FTSE 100 Super Short Strategy (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (SUK2.L) and L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (LUK2.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SUK2.L achieves a -12.71% return, which is significantly lower than LUK2.L's 12.85% return. Over the past 10 years, SUK2.L has underperformed LUK2.L with an annualized return of -17.07%, while LUK2.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.51% annualized return.

SUK2.L

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: -1.24%
• 6M: -7.72%
• YTD: -12.71%
• 1Y: -27.94%
• 3Y*: -19.62%
• 5Y*: -17.69%
• 10Y*: -17.07%

LUK2.L

• 1D: 0.67%
• 1M: 1.34%
• 6M: 6.53%
• YTD: 12.85%
• 1Y: 36.06%
• 3Y*: 24.04%
• 5Y*: 17.31%
• 10Y*: 10.51%

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

SUK2.L vs. LUK2.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SUK2.L L&G FTSE 100 Super Short Strategy (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF GBP (Acc)	-12.71%	-32.13%	-6.81%	-6.41%	-13.97%	-32.73%	-1.17%	-29.96%	15.40%	-23.23%
LUK2.L L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF GBP (Acc)	12.85%	43.73%	9.81%	6.59%	3.75%	34.76%	-30.43%	32.52%	-20.70%	22.28%

Correlation

The correlation between SUK2.L and LUK2.L is -0.97, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.97
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.99
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.99
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.99
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2009	-0.98

The correlation between SUK2.L and LUK2.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.99 to -0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

SUK2.L vs. LUK2.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

SUK2.L

SUK2.L Risk / Return Rank: 1
SUK2.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
SUK2.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
SUK2.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1
SUK2.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
SUK2.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1

LUK2.L

LUK2.L Risk / Return Rank: 57
LUK2.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
LUK2.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
LUK2.L Omega Ratio Rank: 64
LUK2.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
LUK2.L Martin Ratio Rank: 46

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.

SUK2.L vs. LUK2.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G FTSE 100 Super Short Strategy (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (SUK2.L) and L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (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.

	SUK2.L	LUK2.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.24	1.59	-2.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.82	2.18	-4.00
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.80	1.29	-0.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.91	1.94	-2.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.45	5.67	-7.12

SUK2.L vs. LUK2.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SUK2.L Sharpe Ratio is -1.24, which is lower than the LUK2.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SUK2.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.

Drawdowns

SUK2.L vs. LUK2.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SUK2.L drawdown since its inception was -98.38%, which is greater than LUK2.L's maximum drawdown of -58.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SUK2.L and LUK2.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	SUK2.L	LUK2.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.38%	-58.84%	-39.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.53%	-18.55%	-11.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-52.62%	-25.42%	-27.20%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-65.37%	-25.42%	-39.95%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-86.18%	-58.84%	-27.34%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-98.31%	-6.16%	-92.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-84.98%	-10.67%	-74.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	18.90%	6.34%	+12.56%

Volatility

SUK2.L vs. LUK2.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G FTSE 100 Super Short Strategy (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (SUK2.L) and L&G FTSE 100 Leveraged (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF GBP (Acc) (LUK2.L) have volatilities of 5.69% and 5.83%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	SUK2.L	LUK2.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.69%	5.83%	-0.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.48%	19.66%	-0.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.53%	22.62%	-0.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.52%	25.60%	-0.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.98%	29.65%	+0.33%

SUK2.L vs. LUK2.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

SUK2.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than LUK2.L's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

SUK2.L vs. LUK2.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither SUK2.L nor LUK2.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SUK2.L and LUK2.L in my portfolio?

SUK2.L and LUK2.L have a correlation of -0.97, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, SUK2.L or LUK2.L?

On fees, LUK2.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, SUK2.L or LUK2.L?

LUK2.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SUK2.L.

What is the main difference between SUK2.L and LUK2.L?

SUK2.L is categorized as Inverse Equities, while LUK2.L is Leveraged Equities. SUK2.L tracks FTSE 100 Daily Super Short Strategy Index, while LUK2.L tracks FTSE 100 Daily Leveraged Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for SUK2.L and 0.50% for LUK2.L.