UB02.L vs. LGAP.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

UB02.L (UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Japan UCITS ETF (JPY) A-dis) and LGAP.L (L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - UB02.L is a Japan Equities fund tracking the TOPIX TR JPY, while LGAP.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the Solactive Core Developed Markets Pacific ex Japan Large & Mid Cap USD Index NTR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UB02.L returned 9.33%/yr vs 5.84%/yr for LGAP.L. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UB02.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for LGAP.L.

Performance

UB02.L vs. LGAP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Japan UCITS ETF (JPY) A-dis (UB02.L) and L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (LGAP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

UB02.L is traded in GBp, while LGAP.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the LGAP.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UB02.L achieves a 12.50% return, which is significantly higher than LGAP.L's 8.82% return.

UB02.L

• 1D: -2.05%
• 1M: -5.96%
• 6M: 5.62%
• YTD: 12.50%
• 1Y: 30.04%
• 3Y*: 15.09%
• 5Y*: 9.33%
• 10Y*: 8.76%

LGAP.L

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: -2.17%
• 6M: 5.38%
• YTD: 8.82%
• 1Y: 13.02%
• 3Y*: 10.73%
• 5Y*: 5.84%
• 10Y*: —

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

UB02.L vs. LGAP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
UB02.L UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Japan UCITS ETF (JPY) A-dis	12.50%	17.42%	9.12%	13.98%	-7.14%	2.16%	12.42%	14.28%	-5.17%
LGAP.L L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	8.82%	12.35%	6.50%	-0.42%	5.57%	3.84%	5.25%	13.30%	0.38%

Correlation

The correlation between UB02.L and LGAP.L is 0.53, 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	0.53
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.48
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2018	0.56

The correlation between UB02.L and LGAP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

UB02.L vs. LGAP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

UB02.L

UB02.L Risk / Return Rank: 64
UB02.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
UB02.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
UB02.L Omega Ratio Rank: 61
UB02.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
UB02.L Martin Ratio Rank: 64

LGAP.L

LGAP.L Risk / Return Rank: 36
LGAP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
LGAP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
LGAP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 32
LGAP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
LGAP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

UB02.L vs. LGAP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Japan UCITS ETF (JPY) A-dis (UB02.L) and L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (LGAP.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.

	UB02.L	LGAP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.53	1.02	+0.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	1.55	+0.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.19	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.80	1.84	+0.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.41	4.79	+3.63

UB02.L vs. LGAP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UB02.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is higher than the LGAP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UB02.L and LGAP.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

UB02.L vs. LGAP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UB02.L drawdown since its inception was -23.08%, smaller than the maximum LGAP.L drawdown of -32.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UB02.L and LGAP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	UB02.L	LGAP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.08%	-32.02%	+8.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.68%	-7.06%	-3.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.15%	-17.57%	+3.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.58%	-18.59%	+0.01%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-23.08%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.47%	-2.86%	-5.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.87%	-5.98%	+0.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.56%	2.71%	+0.85%

Volatility

UB02.L vs. LGAP.L - Volatility Comparison

UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Japan UCITS ETF (JPY) A-dis (UB02.L) has a higher volatility of 6.74% compared to L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (LGAP.L) at 3.00%. This indicates that UB02.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LGAP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UB02.L	LGAP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.74%	3.00%	+3.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.22%	10.48%	+5.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.60%	12.70%	+6.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.11%	15.20%	+0.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.79%	17.53%	-1.74%

UB02.L vs. LGAP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

UB02.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than LGAP.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

UB02.L vs. LGAP.L - Dividend Comparison

UB02.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.65%, while LGAP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LGAP.L L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UB02.L UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Japan UCITS ETF (JPY) A-dis	1.65%	1.68%	1.71%	1.82%	1.99%	1.58%	1.62%	1.75%	1.56%	1.30%	1.45%	1.18%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UB02.L and LGAP.L in my portfolio?

UB02.L and LGAP.L have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, UB02.L or LGAP.L?

On fees, LGAP.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, UB02.L or LGAP.L?

LGAP.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for UB02.L.

What is the main difference between UB02.L and LGAP.L?

UB02.L is categorized as Japan Equities, while LGAP.L is Asia Pacific Equities. UB02.L tracks TOPIX TR JPY, while LGAP.L tracks Solactive Core Developed Markets Pacific ex Japan Large & Mid Cap USD Index NTR. They also come from different issuers: UBS and L&G. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for UB02.L and 0.10% for LGAP.L.