500G.L vs. RS2G.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

500G.L (Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc) and RS2G.L (Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD) are both exchange-traded funds - 500G.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500, while RS2G.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, 500G.L returned 16.24%/yr vs 11.51%/yr for RS2G.L. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. 500G.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RS2G.L.

Performance

500G.L vs. RS2G.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500G.L) and Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD (RS2G.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 500G.L achieves a 10.57% return, which is significantly lower than RS2G.L's 18.06% return. Over the past 10 years, 500G.L has outperformed RS2G.L with an annualized return of 16.24%, while RS2G.L has yielded a comparatively lower 11.51% annualized return.

500G.L

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 5.53%
• YTD: 10.57%
• 6M: 10.49%
• 1Y: 29.21%
• 3Y*: 19.12%
• 5Y*: 15.05%
• 10Y*: 16.24%

RS2G.L

• 1D: 1.24%
• 1M: 4.44%
• YTD: 18.06%
• 6M: 15.88%
• 1Y: 42.31%
• 3Y*: 15.57%
• 5Y*: 7.25%
• 10Y*: 11.51%

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

500G.L vs. RS2G.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
500G.L Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc	10.57%	9.44%	27.44%	19.89%	-8.86%	31.35%	13.81%	27.01%	0.05%	10.79%
RS2G.L Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD	18.06%	4.55%	11.87%	12.47%	-11.37%	15.31%	15.83%	21.59%	-7.91%	4.60%

Correlation

The correlation between 500G.L and RS2G.L is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.66
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2016	0.76

The correlation between 500G.L and RS2G.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.64 (1 year) to 0.76 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

500G.L vs. RS2G.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

500G.L

500G.L Risk / Return Rank: 82
500G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
500G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
500G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 85
500G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
500G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 79

RS2G.L

RS2G.L Risk / Return Rank: 77
RS2G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RS2G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
RS2G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 70
RS2G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
RS2G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

500G.L vs. RS2G.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500G.L) and Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD (RS2G.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.

	500G.L	RS2G.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.76	2.50	+0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.61	3.37	+0.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.41	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.08	4.84	-0.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.27	14.20	+1.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

500G.L vs. RS2G.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 500G.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is comparable to the RS2G.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 500G.L and RS2G.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

	500G.L	RS2G.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.76	2.50	+0.26
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.05	0.36	+0.69
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	1.05	0.55	+0.50
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.07	0.60	+0.47

Drawdowns

500G.L vs. RS2G.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 500G.L drawdown since its inception was -25.52%, smaller than the maximum RS2G.L drawdown of -35.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 500G.L and RS2G.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	500G.L	RS2G.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.52%	-35.05%	+9.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.12%	-8.69%	+1.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.12%	-30.04%	+8.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.12%	-30.04%	+8.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.52%	-35.05%	+9.53%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.22%	0.00%	-0.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.29%	-8.55%	+5.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.91%	2.97%	-1.06%

Volatility

500G.L vs. RS2G.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500G.L) is 2.65%, while Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD (RS2G.L) has a volatility of 5.30%. This indicates that 500G.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RS2G.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	500G.L	RS2G.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.65%	5.30%	-2.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.13%	11.90%	-4.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.55%	16.87%	-6.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.31%	20.07%	-5.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.54%	20.93%	-5.39%

500G.L vs. RS2G.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

500G.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than RS2G.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

500G.L vs. RS2G.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither 500G.L nor RS2G.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both 500G.L and RS2G.L in my portfolio?

500G.L and RS2G.L have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, 500G.L or RS2G.L?

On fees, 500G.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, 500G.L or RS2G.L?

500G.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RS2G.L.

What is the main difference between 500G.L and RS2G.L?

500G.L is categorized as S&P 500, while RS2G.L is Small Cap Blend Equities. 500G.L tracks S&P 500, while RS2G.L tracks Russell 2000 TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for 500G.L and 0.35% for RS2G.L.