XMTW.L vs. LDAG.L
XMTW.L (Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C) and LDAG.L (L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - XMTW.L tracks the MSCI Taiwan NR USD while LDAG.L tracks the MSCI AC Asia Pac Ex JPN NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMTW.L returned 23.21%/yr vs 9.96%/yr for LDAG.L. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMTW.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for LDAG.L.
Performance
XMTW.L vs. LDAG.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMTW.L achieves a 67.90% return, which is significantly higher than LDAG.L's 15.96% return.
XMTW.L
- 1D
- -1.55%
- 1M
- 14.93%
- YTD
- 67.90%
- 6M
- 73.86%
- 1Y
- 118.61%
- 3Y*
- 41.00%
- 5Y*
- 23.21%
- 10Y*
- 23.25%
LDAG.L
- 1D
- -1.55%
- 1M
- 0.03%
- YTD
- 15.96%
- 6M
- 14.78%
- 1Y
- 37.27%
- 3Y*
- 17.83%
- 5Y*
- 9.96%
- 10Y*
- —
XMTW.L vs. LDAG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XMTW.L Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C | 67.90% | 23.98% | 25.99% | 21.66% | -21.11% | 12.00% |
LDAG.L L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF | 15.96% | 26.41% | 5.50% | 3.28% | 1.73% | -0.75% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMTW.L and LDAG.L is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2021 | 0.57 |
The correlation between XMTW.L and LDAG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (1 year) to 0.57 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XMTW.L vs. LDAG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMTW.L
LDAG.L
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Energy
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
XMTW.L
LDAG.L
Financial Services
XMTW.L
LDAG.L
Industrials
XMTW.L
LDAG.L
Basic Materials
XMTW.L
LDAG.L
Communication Services
XMTW.L
LDAG.L
Consumer Cyclical
XMTW.L
LDAG.L
Consumer Defensive
XMTW.L
LDAG.L
Healthcare
XMTW.L
LDAG.L
Energy
XMTW.L
-
LDAG.L
Real Estate
XMTW.L
-
LDAG.L
Utilities
XMTW.L
-
LDAG.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
XMTW.L vs. LDAG.L — Risk / Return Rank
XMTW.L
LDAG.L
XMTW.L vs. LDAG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C (XMTW.L) and L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF (LDAG.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.
| XMTW.L | LDAG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.35 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.84 | 1.47 | +0.37 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 13.03 | 3.87 | +9.16 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 36.03 | 10.60 | +25.43 |
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
| XMTW.L | LDAG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.22 | 2.72 | +2.51 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.13 | 0.77 | +0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 1.16 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.66 | 0.76 | -0.09 |
Drawdowns
XMTW.L vs. LDAG.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMTW.L drawdown since its inception was -47.86%, which is greater than LDAG.L's maximum drawdown of -14.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMTW.L and LDAG.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMTW.L | LDAG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -47.86% | -14.68% | -33.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.05% | -9.58% | +0.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.76% | -14.68% | -14.08% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.18% | -14.68% | -15.50% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -30.18% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.57% | -3.00% | +1.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.70% | -4.33% | -4.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.28% | 3.51% | -0.23% |
Volatility
XMTW.L vs. LDAG.L - Volatility Comparison
Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C (XMTW.L) has a higher volatility of 9.41% compared to L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF (LDAG.L) at 4.72%. This indicates that XMTW.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LDAG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMTW.L | LDAG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.41% | 4.72% | +4.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.21% | 10.47% | +7.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.59% | 13.75% | +8.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.47% | 12.90% | +7.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.06% | 12.90% | +7.16% |
XMTW.L vs. LDAG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMTW.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than LDAG.L's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
XMTW.L vs. LDAG.L - Dividend Comparison
XMTW.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LDAG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.78%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LDAG.L L&G Quality Equity Dividends ESG Exclusions Asia Pacific ex-Japan UCITS ETF | 3.78% | 4.23% | 4.75% | 5.40% | 4.80% | 2.19% |
XMTW.L Xtrackers MSCI Taiwan UCITS ETF 1C | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XMTW.L and LDAG.L have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LDAG.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LDAG.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for XMTW.L.
XMTW.L tracks MSCI Taiwan NR USD, while LDAG.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Pac Ex JPN NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for XMTW.L and 0.40% for LDAG.L.
Find the right allocation for XMTW.L and LDAG.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