AGES.L vs. CSP1.L
AGES.L (iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF) and CSP1.L (iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AGES.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD, while CSP1.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AGES.L returned 4.88%/yr vs 14.93%/yr for CSP1.L. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AGES.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for CSP1.L.
Performance
AGES.L vs. CSP1.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AGES.L achieves a 0.19% return, which is significantly lower than CSP1.L's 10.49% return.
AGES.L
- 1D
- -0.94%
- 1M
- -0.00%
- YTD
- 0.19%
- 6M
- 1.82%
- 1Y
- 17.26%
- 3Y*
- 10.51%
- 5Y*
- 4.88%
- 10Y*
- —
CSP1.L
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- 5.91%
- YTD
- 10.49%
- 6M
- 10.33%
- 1Y
- 29.03%
- 3Y*
- 19.30%
- 5Y*
- 14.93%
- 10Y*
- 16.22%
AGES.L vs. CSP1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGES.L iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF | 0.19% | 18.29% | 9.75% | 2.81% | -3.90% | 5.94% | 9.34% | 15.79% | -8.27% | 11.22% |
CSP1.L iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF | 10.49% | 9.37% | 27.35% | 19.79% | -9.05% | 31.07% | 13.65% | 26.42% | 0.01% | 10.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between AGES.L and CSP1.L is 0.62, 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 | 0.62 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2016 | 0.80 |
The correlation between AGES.L and CSP1.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (1 year) to 0.80 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
AGES.L vs. CSP1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
AGES.L
CSP1.L
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Industrials
-
Utilities
-
Healthcare
AGES.L
CSP1.L
Financial Services
AGES.L
CSP1.L
Consumer Cyclical
AGES.L
CSP1.L
Real Estate
AGES.L
CSP1.L
Basic Materials
AGES.L
CSP1.L
Technology
AGES.L
CSP1.L
Communication Services
AGES.L
CSP1.L
Consumer Defensive
AGES.L
-
CSP1.L
Energy
AGES.L
-
CSP1.L
Industrials
AGES.L
-
CSP1.L
Utilities
AGES.L
-
CSP1.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
AGES.L vs. CSP1.L — Risk / Return Rank
AGES.L
CSP1.L
AGES.L vs. CSP1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF (AGES.L) and iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.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.
| AGES.L | CSP1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.51 | -0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.52 | 4.06 | -1.54 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.64 | 14.94 | -6.30 |
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
| AGES.L | CSP1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.49 | 2.72 | -1.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.35 | 1.04 | -0.70 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 1.04 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.45 | 1.09 | -0.64 |
Drawdowns
AGES.L vs. CSP1.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AGES.L drawdown since its inception was -31.02%, which is greater than CSP1.L's maximum drawdown of -25.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGES.L and CSP1.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AGES.L | CSP1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.02% | -25.48% | -5.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.81% | -7.12% | +0.31% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.04% | -20.77% | +3.73% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.15% | -20.77% | +1.62% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -25.48% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.97% | -0.29% | -2.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.90% | -3.32% | -1.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.99% | 1.94% | +0.05% |
Volatility
AGES.L vs. CSP1.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Ageing Population UCITS ETF (AGES.L) and iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L) have volatilities of 2.73% and 2.61%, 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AGES.L | CSP1.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.73% | 2.61% | +0.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.92% | 7.16% | +1.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.53% | 10.70% | +0.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.11% | 14.31% | -0.20% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.49% | 15.58% | -0.09% |
AGES.L vs. CSP1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
AGES.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than CSP1.L's 0.07% expense ratio.
Dividends
AGES.L vs. CSP1.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither AGES.L nor CSP1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
AGES.L and CSP1.L have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CSP1.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CSP1.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for AGES.L.
AGES.L is categorized as Global Equities, while CSP1.L is S&P 500. AGES.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD, while CSP1.L tracks S&P 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for AGES.L and 0.07% for CSP1.L.
Find the right allocation for AGES.L and CSP1.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