PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
TRIP.L vs. EBIG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

TRIP.L vs. EBIG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF (TRIP.L) and Global X E-commerce UCITS ETF USD Accumulating (EBIG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

TRIP.L is traded in GBp, while EBIG.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the EBIG.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TRIP.L achieves a -3.70% return, which is significantly higher than EBIG.L's -14.25% return.


TRIP.L

1D
0.43%
1M
6.91%
YTD
-3.70%
6M
1.41%
1Y
14.66%
3Y*
13.99%
5Y*
10Y*

EBIG.L

1D
1.50%
1M
0.30%
YTD
-14.25%
6M
-14.34%
1Y
-7.64%
3Y*
14.80%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TRIP.L vs. EBIG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
TRIP.L
HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF
-3.70%10.16%28.46%23.58%-9.55%-5.83%
EBIG.L
Global X E-commerce UCITS ETF USD Accumulating
-14.25%9.95%33.02%24.95%-34.59%-36.94%

Correlation

The correlation between TRIP.L and EBIG.L is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.55

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

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 17, 2021

0.64

The correlation between TRIP.L and EBIG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

TRIP.L vs. EBIG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

TRIP.L
TRIP.L Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
TRIP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

EBIG.L
EBIG.L Risk / Return Rank: 66
Overall Rank
EBIG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EBIG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
EBIG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
EBIG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
EBIG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 66
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.

TRIP.L vs. EBIG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF (TRIP.L) and Global X E-commerce UCITS ETF USD Accumulating (EBIG.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.


TRIP.LEBIG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.72

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.16

0.95

+0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.51

-0.30

+0.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.78

-0.59

+1.37

TRIP.L vs. EBIG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TRIP.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.30, which is higher than the EBIG.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TRIP.L and EBIG.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


TRIP.LEBIG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.30

-0.42

+0.72

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.02

-0.31

+0.30

Drawdowns

TRIP.L vs. EBIG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TRIP.L drawdown since its inception was -48.20%, smaller than the maximum EBIG.L drawdown of -61.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TRIP.L and EBIG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TRIP.LEBIG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.20%

-61.10%

+12.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-28.90%

-25.69%

-3.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-32.24%

-26.57%

-5.67%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-23.05%

-35.35%

+12.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.52%

-42.51%

+12.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

18.76%

12.87%

+5.89%

Volatility

TRIP.L vs. EBIG.L - Volatility Comparison

HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF (TRIP.L) has a higher volatility of 7.33% compared to Global X E-commerce UCITS ETF USD Accumulating (EBIG.L) at 4.41%. This indicates that TRIP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EBIG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


TRIP.LEBIG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.33%

4.41%

+2.92%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.90%

14.03%

+3.87%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

48.17%

18.12%

+30.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

39.64%

29.21%

+10.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

39.64%

29.21%

+10.43%

TRIP.L vs. EBIG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

TRIP.L has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than EBIG.L's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

TRIP.L vs. EBIG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither TRIP.L nor EBIG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


TRIP.L and EBIG.L have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

EBIG.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for TRIP.L.

Both ETFs track Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR. They also come from different issuers: HANetf and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for TRIP.L and 0.50% for EBIG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for TRIP.L and EBIG.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