TRET.L vs. EPRA.L
TRET.L (VanEck Global Real Estate UCITS ETF) and EPRA.L (Amundi Index FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global UCITS ETF DR) are both REIT funds - TRET.L tracks the GPR Global 100 Index while EPRA.L tracks the FTSE EPRA Nareit Global TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TRET.L returned 2.34%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for EPRA.L. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TRET.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for EPRA.L.
Performance
TRET.L vs. EPRA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
TRET.L is traded in USD, while EPRA.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the EPRA.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TRET.L achieves a 4.02% return, which is significantly lower than EPRA.L's 6.53% return.
TRET.L
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- -2.23%
- YTD
- 4.02%
- 6M
- 3.83%
- 1Y
- 10.68%
- 3Y*
- 10.83%
- 5Y*
- 2.34%
- 10Y*
- —
EPRA.L
- 1D
- 0.28%
- 1M
- -1.45%
- YTD
- 6.53%
- 6M
- 7.28%
- 1Y
- 11.70%
- 3Y*
- 8.85%
- 5Y*
- 0.95%
- 10Y*
- —
TRET.L vs. EPRA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TRET.L VanEck Global Real Estate UCITS ETF | 4.02% | 14.43% | 1.05% | 13.94% | -25.68% | 29.73% | -6.91% | 10.01% |
EPRA.L Amundi Index FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global UCITS ETF DR | 6.53% | 10.90% | -0.38% | 9.91% | -25.00% | 26.68% | -9.29% | 15.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between TRET.L and EPRA.L is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2019 | 0.91 |
The correlation between TRET.L and EPRA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
TRET.L vs. EPRA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TRET.L
EPRA.L
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Real Estate
TRET.L
EPRA.L
Consumer Cyclical
TRET.L
EPRA.L
Financial Services
TRET.L
EPRA.L
Basic Materials
TRET.L
-
EPRA.L
Communication Services
TRET.L
-
EPRA.L
Consumer Defensive
TRET.L
-
EPRA.L
Energy
TRET.L
-
EPRA.L
Healthcare
TRET.L
-
EPRA.L
Industrials
TRET.L
-
EPRA.L
Technology
TRET.L
-
EPRA.L
Utilities
TRET.L
-
EPRA.L
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
TRET.L vs. EPRA.L — Risk / Return Rank
TRET.L
EPRA.L
TRET.L vs. EPRA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Global Real Estate UCITS ETF (TRET.L) and Amundi Index FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global UCITS ETF DR (EPRA.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.
| TRET.L | EPRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.17 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.01 | 1.11 | -0.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.55 | 4.12 | -0.57 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| TRET.L | EPRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.86 | 1.00 | -0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.14 | 0.06 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.22 | 0.19 | +0.03 |
Drawdowns
TRET.L vs. EPRA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TRET.L drawdown since its inception was -42.26%, roughly equal to the maximum EPRA.L drawdown of -42.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TRET.L and EPRA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TRET.L | EPRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.26% | -42.78% | +0.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.49% | -10.50% | +0.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.92% | -18.35% | +1.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -33.35% | -33.59% | +0.24% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.89% | -3.93% | -1.96% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.96% | -11.50% | -0.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.00% | 2.84% | +0.16% |
Volatility
TRET.L vs. EPRA.L - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Global Real Estate UCITS ETF (TRET.L) has a higher volatility of 3.91% compared to Amundi Index FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global UCITS ETF DR (EPRA.L) at 3.71%. This indicates that TRET.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EPRA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TRET.L | EPRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.91% | 3.71% | +0.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.60% | 9.00% | +0.60% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.33% | 11.70% | +0.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.82% | 15.95% | +0.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.18% | 17.36% | +1.82% |
TRET.L vs. EPRA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
TRET.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than EPRA.L's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
TRET.L vs. EPRA.L - Dividend Comparison
TRET.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.49%, while EPRA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EPRA.L Amundi Index FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global UCITS ETF DR | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TRET.L VanEck Global Real Estate UCITS ETF | 3.49% | 3.54% | 3.56% | 3.54% | 4.56% | 1.86% | 4.18% | 0.62% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TRET.L and EPRA.L have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EPRA.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EPRA.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for TRET.L.
TRET.L tracks GPR Global 100 Index, while EPRA.L tracks FTSE EPRA Nareit Global TR USD. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for TRET.L and 0.10% for EPRA.L.
Find the right allocation for TRET.L and EPRA.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