CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

CSP1.L (iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF) and IMSU.L (iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - CSP1.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while IMSU.L is a Materials fund tracking the MSCI World/Materials NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CSP1.L returned 14.38%/yr vs 6.55%/yr for IMSU.L. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CSP1.L charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for IMSU.L.

Performance

CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L) and iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IMSU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSP1.L achieves a 8.73% return, which is significantly lower than IMSU.L's 13.42% return.

CSP1.L

• 1D: 1.46%
• 1M: 1.17%
• YTD: 8.73%
• 6M: 9.12%
• 1Y: 26.08%
• 3Y*: 18.26%
• 5Y*: 14.38%
• 10Y*: 15.83%

IMSU.L

• 1D: 3.01%
• 1M: 0.18%
• YTD: 13.42%
• 6M: 14.88%
• 1Y: 20.12%
• 3Y*: 7.91%
• 5Y*: 6.55%
• 10Y*: —

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

CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CSP1.L iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF	8.73%	9.37%	27.35%	19.79%	-9.05%	31.07%	13.65%	26.42%	0.01%	7.04%
IMSU.L iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	13.42%	3.37%	0.69%	6.26%	-1.35%	28.63%	16.34%	19.09%	-9.88%	-12.89%

Correlation

The correlation between CSP1.L and IMSU.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	0.52
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2017	0.67

Over the past year, the correlation between CSP1.L and IMSU.L has dropped to 0.41 - well below their long-term average of 0.67, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CSP1.L	IMSU.L
Technology	38.4%	-
Financial Services	11.0%	-
Communication Services	10.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	8.6%
Healthcare	8.4%	-
Industrials	7.9%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	-
Energy	3.2%	-
Utilities	2.1%	-
Real Estate	1.8%	-
Basic Materials	1.7%	91.4%

Return for Risk

CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSP1.L

CSP1.L Risk / Return Rank: 82
CSP1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
CSP1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
CSP1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 85
CSP1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
CSP1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 79

IMSU.L

IMSU.L Risk / Return Rank: 41
IMSU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
IMSU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
IMSU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 39
IMSU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
IMSU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L) and iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IMSU.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.

	CSP1.L	IMSU.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.39	1.33	+1.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.22	1.94	+1.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.23	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.64	1.86	+1.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.18	6.07	+7.11

CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSP1.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is higher than the IMSU.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSP1.L and IMSU.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

CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSP1.L drawdown since its inception was -25.48%, smaller than the maximum IMSU.L drawdown of -33.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSP1.L and IMSU.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSP1.L	IMSU.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.48%	-33.22%	+7.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.12%	-10.76%	+3.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.77%	-25.16%	+4.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.77%	-25.16%	+4.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.48%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.88%	-2.70%	+0.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.65%	-11.19%	+7.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.97%	3.31%	-1.34%

Volatility

CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L) is 3.54%, while iShares S&P 500 Materials Sector UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IMSU.L) has a volatility of 5.66%. This indicates that CSP1.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IMSU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CSP1.L	IMSU.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.54%	5.66%	-2.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.53%	12.26%	-4.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.91%	15.12%	-4.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.02%	21.54%	-1.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.45%	24.98%	-6.53%

CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSP1.L has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than IMSU.L's 0.15% 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

CSP1.L vs. IMSU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CSP1.L nor IMSU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CSP1.L and IMSU.L in my portfolio?

CSP1.L and IMSU.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, CSP1.L or IMSU.L?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, CSP1.L or IMSU.L?

CSP1.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for IMSU.L.

What is the main difference between CSP1.L and IMSU.L?

CSP1.L is categorized as S&P 500, while IMSU.L is Materials. CSP1.L tracks S&P 500 Index, while IMSU.L tracks MSCI World/Materials NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for CSP1.L and 0.15% for IMSU.L.