SUK2.L vs. RTWO.L
SUK2.L (L&G FTSE 100 Super Short Strategy (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF) and RTWO.L (L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - SUK2.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the L&G FTSE 100 Super Short Strategy (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF, while RTWO.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SUK2.L returned -16.92%/yr vs 10.92%/yr for RTWO.L. At a correlation of -0.58, they often move in opposite directions. SUK2.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for RTWO.L.
Performance
SUK2.L vs. RTWO.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
SUK2.L is traded in GBp, while RTWO.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the RTWO.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SUK2.L achieves a -11.17% return, which is significantly lower than RTWO.L's 19.61% return. Over the past 10 years, SUK2.L has underperformed RTWO.L with an annualized return of -16.92%, while RTWO.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.92% annualized return.
SUK2.L
- 1D
- 0.40%
- 1M
- -0.81%
- 6M
- -7.00%
- YTD
- -11.17%
- 1Y
- -26.96%
- 3Y*
- -19.46%
- 5Y*
- -17.40%
- 10Y*
- -16.92%
RTWO.L
- 1D
- -0.48%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- 6M
- 13.68%
- YTD
- 19.61%
- 1Y
- 31.90%
- 3Y*
- 15.08%
- 5Y*
- 8.88%
- 10Y*
- 10.92%
SUK2.L vs. RTWO.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 | -11.17% | -32.13% | -6.81% | -6.41% | -13.97% | -32.73% | -1.17% | -29.96% | 15.40% | -23.23% |
RTWO.L L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc | 19.61% | 3.40% | 11.14% | 14.05% | -9.01% | 20.34% | 16.30% | 19.76% | -6.99% | 4.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between SUK2.L and RTWO.L is -0.42, 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 | -0.42 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.48 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.52 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2009 | -0.58 |
The correlation between SUK2.L and RTWO.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.58 (all time) to -0.42 (1 year), 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
SUK2.L vs. RTWO.L — Risk / Return Rank
SUK2.L
RTWO.L
SUK2.L vs. RTWO.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 (SUK2.L) and L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.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 | RTWO.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.38 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.80 | 1.32 | -0.52 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.87 | 4.18 | -5.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.37 | 12.53 | -13.90 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SUK2.L vs. RTWO.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SUK2.L drawdown since its inception was -98.38%, which is greater than RTWO.L's maximum drawdown of -45.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SUK2.L and RTWO.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SUK2.L | RTWO.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -98.38% | -45.27% | -53.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -31.12% | -7.59% | -23.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -52.62% | -28.40% | -24.22% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -65.37% | -28.40% | -36.97% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -86.18% | -35.32% | -50.86% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -98.28% | -3.14% | -95.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -84.98% | -8.28% | -76.70% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 19.11% | 2.54% | +16.57% |
Volatility
SUK2.L vs. RTWO.L - Volatility Comparison
L&G FTSE 100 Super Short Strategy (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF (SUK2.L) has a higher volatility of 5.99% compared to L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap Quality UCITS ETF USD Acc (RTWO.L) at 4.93%. This indicates that SUK2.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RTWO.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SUK2.L | RTWO.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.99% | 4.93% | +1.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.46% | 12.92% | +6.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.52% | 16.98% | +5.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.53% | 20.15% | +5.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.98% | 20.99% | +8.99% |
SUK2.L vs. RTWO.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
SUK2.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than RTWO.L's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
SUK2.L vs. RTWO.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither SUK2.L nor RTWO.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SUK2.L and RTWO.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, 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 0.60% for SUK2.L.
SUK2.L is categorized as Technology Equities, while RTWO.L is Small Cap Blend Equities. SUK2.L tracks L&G FTSE 100 Super Short Strategy (Daily 2x) UCITS ETF, while RTWO.L tracks Russell 2000 0.4 Quality Target Exposure Factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for SUK2.L and 0.30% for RTWO.L.
Find the right allocation for SUK2.L and RTWO.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