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

Performance

TRIP.L vs. LUXG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF (TRIP.L) and Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD (LUXG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

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


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
TRIP.L
HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF
-10.32%10.16%28.46%23.58%-9.55%-36.44%
LUXG.L
Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD
-12.52%6.94%-0.12%9.77%-14.46%10.10%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TRIP.L achieves a -10.32% return, which is significantly higher than LUXG.L's -12.52% return.


TRIP.L

1D
0.42%
1M
-10.46%
YTD
-10.32%
6M
-1.18%
1Y
16.19%
3Y*
12.58%
5Y*
10Y*

LUXG.L

1D
0.72%
1M
-8.97%
YTD
-12.52%
6M
-9.20%
1Y
3.09%
3Y*
-3.64%
5Y*
0.41%
10Y*
9.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


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

TRIP.L has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than LUXG.L's 0.25% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

TRIP.L vs. LUXG.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: 2727
Overall Rank
TRIP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
TRIP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank

LUXG.L
LUXG.L Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
LUXG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LUXG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
LUXG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
LUXG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
LUXG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
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. LUXG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF (TRIP.L) and Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD (LUXG.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.LLUXG.LDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.33

0.24

+0.09

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.90

0.47

+0.42

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.06

+0.12

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.54

0.19

+0.34

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

0.98

0.62

+0.37

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

The current TRIP.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.33, which is higher than the LUXG.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TRIP.L and LUXG.L, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


TRIP.LLUXG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.33

0.24

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.05

0.48

-0.54

Correlation

The correlation between TRIP.L and LUXG.L is 0.69, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.


Dividends

TRIP.L vs. LUXG.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

TRIP.L vs. LUXG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TRIP.L drawdown since its inception was -48.20%, which is greater than LUXG.L's maximum drawdown of -36.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TRIP.L and LUXG.L.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


TRIP.LLUXG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.20%

-36.58%

-11.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-28.65%

-15.95%

-12.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-28.34%

-16.79%

-11.55%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.66%

-8.10%

-21.56%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

15.61%

5.01%

+10.60%

Volatility

TRIP.L vs. LUXG.L - Volatility Comparison

HANetf The Travel UCITS ETF (TRIP.L) has a higher volatility of 7.28% compared to Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD (LUXG.L) at 6.78%. This indicates that TRIP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LUXG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


TRIP.LLUXG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.28%

6.78%

+0.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

43.97%

13.09%

+30.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

48.51%

19.74%

+28.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

39.91%

20.27%

+19.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

39.91%

20.18%

+19.73%