XSEN.L vs. RENG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XSEN.L (Xtrackers MSCI USA Energy UCITS ETF 1D) and RENG.L (L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF) are both Energy Equities funds - XSEN.L tracks the MSCI World/Energy NR USD while RENG.L tracks the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XSEN.L returned 21.37%/yr vs 9.39%/yr for RENG.L. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XSEN.L charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for RENG.L.

Performance

XSEN.L vs. RENG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI USA Energy UCITS ETF 1D (XSEN.L) and L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XSEN.L achieves a 30.06% return, which is significantly lower than RENG.L's 42.56% return.

XSEN.L

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: -0.61%
• YTD: 30.06%
• 6M: 28.04%
• 1Y: 45.70%
• 3Y*: 14.11%
• 5Y*: 21.37%
• 10Y*: —

RENG.L

• 1D: -1.31%
• 1M: 5.18%
• YTD: 42.56%
• 6M: 39.73%
• 1Y: 85.21%
• 3Y*: 15.80%
• 5Y*: 9.39%
• 10Y*: —

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

XSEN.L vs. RENG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
XSEN.L Xtrackers MSCI USA Energy UCITS ETF 1D	30.06%	1.87%	6.67%	-5.89%	82.86%	50.90%	8.57%
RENG.L L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF	42.56%	40.21%	-12.86%	-13.13%	2.03%	-6.20%	19.80%

Correlation

The correlation between XSEN.L and RENG.L is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.12
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.13
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2020	0.21

The correlation between XSEN.L and RENG.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to 0.23 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XSEN.L vs. RENG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XSEN.L	RENG.L
Energy	100.0%	1.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	3.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	49.4%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	23.8%
Utilities	-	22.3%

Return for Risk

XSEN.L vs. RENG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XSEN.L

XSEN.L Risk / Return Rank: 54
XSEN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
XSEN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
XSEN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 56
XSEN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
XSEN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 51

RENG.L

RENG.L Risk / Return Rank: 94
RENG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
RENG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
RENG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 91
RENG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
RENG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

XSEN.L vs. RENG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI USA Energy UCITS ETF 1D (XSEN.L) and L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENG.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.

	XSEN.L	RENG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.92	3.81	-1.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.37	4.50	-2.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.60	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	9.59	-6.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.57	33.84	-25.27
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XSEN.L vs. RENG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XSEN.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is lower than the RENG.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XSEN.L and RENG.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XSEN.L	RENG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.92	3.81	-1.90
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82	0.43	+0.39
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.34	0.47	-0.13

Drawdowns

XSEN.L vs. RENG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XSEN.L drawdown since its inception was -62.46%, which is greater than RENG.L's maximum drawdown of -45.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XSEN.L and RENG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XSEN.L	RENG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.46%	-45.48%	-16.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.55%	-8.84%	-7.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.22%	-33.95%	+10.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.04%	-40.27%	+16.23%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.31%	-3.08%	-6.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.79%	-20.64%	+2.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.32%	2.51%	+2.81%

Volatility

XSEN.L vs. RENG.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI USA Energy UCITS ETF 1D (XSEN.L) has a higher volatility of 9.04% compared to L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF (RENG.L) at 8.25%. This indicates that XSEN.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RENG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XSEN.L	RENG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.04%	8.25%	+0.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.50%	15.75%	+4.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.79%	22.23%	+1.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.01%	21.71%	+4.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.43%	22.30%	+7.13%

XSEN.L vs. RENG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XSEN.L has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than RENG.L's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

XSEN.L vs. RENG.L - Dividend Comparison

XSEN.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.08%, while RENG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
RENG.L L&G Clean Energy UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XSEN.L Xtrackers MSCI USA Energy UCITS ETF 1D	2.08%	2.70%	2.70%	3.24%	3.69%	3.27%	7.11%	2.78%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XSEN.L and RENG.L in my portfolio?

XSEN.L and RENG.L have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XSEN.L or RENG.L?

On fees, XSEN.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XSEN.L or RENG.L?

XSEN.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for RENG.L.

What is the main difference between XSEN.L and RENG.L?

XSEN.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while RENG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for XSEN.L and 0.49% for RENG.L.