500U.L vs. CSWG.L

Last updated Jun 27, 2026

500U.L (Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc) and CSWG.L (Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF) are both exchange-traded funds - 500U.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while CSWG.L is a Europe Equities fund tracking the MSCI Switzerland NR CHF. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, 500U.L returned 12.92%/yr vs 7.15%/yr for CSWG.L. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. 500U.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for CSWG.L.

Performance

500U.L vs. CSWG.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 (500U.L) and Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF (CSWG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

500U.L is traded in USD, while CSWG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CSWG.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 500U.L achieves a 7.53% return, which is significantly higher than CSWG.L's 6.87% return.

500U.L

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: -1.76%
• YTD: 7.53%
• 6M: 7.30%
• 1Y: 21.60%
• 3Y*: 20.59%
• 5Y*: 12.92%
• 10Y*: —

CSWG.L

• 1D: -0.54%
• 1M: 1.19%
• YTD: 6.87%
• 6M: 5.82%
• 1Y: 19.73%
• 3Y*: 13.53%
• 5Y*: 7.15%
• 10Y*: 7.08%

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

500U.L vs. CSWG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
500U.L Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc	7.53%	17.42%	25.42%	26.85%	-18.63%	29.68%	17.93%	31.98%	-2.14%
CSWG.L Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF	6.87%	32.68%	-2.25%	14.29%	-17.39%	18.68%	11.09%	31.97%	-3.35%

Correlation

The correlation between 500U.L and CSWG.L is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.41
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2018	0.53

The correlation between 500U.L and CSWG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (3 years) to 0.53 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

500U.L vs. CSWG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	500U.L	CSWG.L
Technology	35.6%	0.9%
Financial Services	11.8%	19.4%
Communication Services	11.2%	1.1%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	6.3%
Healthcare	8.5%	37.9%
Industrials	8.3%	13.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	14.3%
Energy	3.5%	2.7%
Utilities	2.4%	0.2%
Real Estate	1.9%	0.7%
Basic Materials	1.8%	5.9%

Return for Risk

500U.L vs. CSWG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

500U.L

500U.L Risk / Return Rank: 64
500U.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
500U.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
500U.L Omega Ratio Rank: 61
500U.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
500U.L Martin Ratio Rank: 68

CSWG.L

CSWG.L Risk / Return Rank: 58
CSWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
CSWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
CSWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 68
CSWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
CSWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

500U.L vs. CSWG.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 (500U.L) and Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF (CSWG.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.

	500U.L	CSWG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.80	1.34	+0.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	1.94	+0.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.24	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.58	1.46	+1.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.74	4.55	+6.19

500U.L vs. CSWG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 500U.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.80, which is higher than the CSWG.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 500U.L and CSWG.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

500U.L vs. CSWG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 500U.L drawdown since its inception was -34.04%, smaller than the maximum CSWG.L drawdown of -39.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 500U.L and CSWG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	500U.L	CSWG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.04%	-39.15%	+5.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.34%	-13.43%	+5.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.29%	-13.43%	-4.86%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.22%	-29.05%	+4.83%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.80%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.10%	-2.03%	-1.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.86%	-11.75%	+6.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.01%	4.33%	-2.32%

Volatility

500U.L vs. CSWG.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500U.L) and Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF (CSWG.L) have volatilities of 3.99% and 4.16%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	500U.L	CSWG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.99%	4.16%	-0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.25%	11.78%	-2.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.97%	14.69%	-2.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.88%	15.69%	+0.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.16%	17.64%	-0.48%

500U.L vs. CSWG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

500U.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than CSWG.L's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

500U.L vs. CSWG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither 500U.L nor CSWG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both 500U.L and CSWG.L in my portfolio?

500U.L and CSWG.L have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, 500U.L or CSWG.L?

On fees, 500U.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, 500U.L or CSWG.L?

500U.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for CSWG.L.

What is the main difference between 500U.L and CSWG.L?

500U.L is categorized as S&P 500, while CSWG.L is Europe Equities. 500U.L tracks S&P 500 Index, while CSWG.L tracks MSCI Switzerland NR CHF. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for 500U.L and 0.25% for CSWG.L.