CSP1.L vs. PQVG.L
CSP1.L (iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF) and PQVG.L (Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF) are both S&P 500 funds - CSP1.L tracks the S&P 500 Index while PQVG.L tracks the S&P 500 Quality, Value, and Momentum Multi-Factor Index (Net Total Return). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CSP1.L returned 14.94%/yr vs 16.68%/yr for PQVG.L. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CSP1.L charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for PQVG.L.
Performance
CSP1.L vs. PQVG.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CSP1.L achieves a 10.55% return, which is significantly lower than PQVG.L's 16.79% return.
CSP1.L
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 5.54%
- YTD
- 10.55%
- 6M
- 10.48%
- 1Y
- 29.13%
- 3Y*
- 19.02%
- 5Y*
- 14.94%
- 10Y*
- 16.07%
PQVG.L
- 1D
- 0.36%
- 1M
- 5.36%
- YTD
- 16.79%
- 6M
- 17.07%
- 1Y
- 24.01%
- 3Y*
- 21.17%
- 5Y*
- 16.68%
- 10Y*
- —
CSP1.L vs. PQVG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSP1.L iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF | 10.55% | 9.37% | 27.35% | 19.79% | -9.05% | 31.07% | 13.65% | 26.42% | 0.01% | 9.31% |
PQVG.L Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF | 16.79% | 5.84% | 32.29% | 0.98% | 12.54% | 27.78% | 4.44% | 21.16% | -1.98% | 14.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between CSP1.L and PQVG.L is 0.55, 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 | 0.55 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 24, 2017 | 0.84 |
Over the past year, the correlation between CSP1.L and PQVG.L has dropped to 0.55 - well below their long-term average of 0.84, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
CSP1.L vs. PQVG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
Technology
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
Financial Services
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
Communication Services
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
Consumer Cyclical
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
Healthcare
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
Industrials
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
Consumer Defensive
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
Energy
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
Utilities
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
Real Estate
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
-
Basic Materials
CSP1.L
PQVG.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
CSP1.L vs. PQVG.L — Risk / Return Rank
CSP1.L
PQVG.L
CSP1.L vs. PQVG.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 Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF (PQVG.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.
| CSP1.L | PQVG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | 1.41 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.07 | 5.82 | -1.75 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.99 | 17.49 | -2.50 |
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
| CSP1.L | PQVG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.73 | 2.31 | +0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.04 | 1.12 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 1.03 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.09 | 0.89 | +0.20 |
Drawdowns
CSP1.L vs. PQVG.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CSP1.L drawdown since its inception was -25.48%, roughly equal to the maximum PQVG.L drawdown of -25.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSP1.L and PQVG.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CSP1.L | PQVG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.48% | -25.88% | +0.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.12% | -4.11% | -3.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.77% | -17.44% | -3.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.77% | -17.44% | -3.33% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -25.48% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.24% | 0.00% | -0.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.32% | -4.17% | +0.85% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.94% | 1.37% | +0.57% |
Volatility
CSP1.L vs. PQVG.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L) is 2.62%, while Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF (PQVG.L) has a volatility of 2.79%. This indicates that CSP1.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PQVG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CSP1.L | PQVG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.62% | 2.79% | -0.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.16% | 7.88% | -0.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.62% | 10.37% | +0.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.31% | 14.89% | -0.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.57% | 16.24% | -0.67% |
CSP1.L vs. PQVG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CSP1.L has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than PQVG.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
CSP1.L vs. PQVG.L - Dividend Comparison
CSP1.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PQVG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.77%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSP1.L iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PQVG.L Invesco S&P 500 QVM UCITS ETF | 0.77% | 0.82% | 0.82% | 1.61% | 1.77% | 0.87% | 1.59% | 1.41% | 1.30% | 0.72% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CSP1.L and PQVG.L have a correlation of 0.55, 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 0.35% for PQVG.L.
CSP1.L tracks S&P 500 Index, while PQVG.L tracks S&P 500 Quality, Value, and Momentum Multi-Factor Index (Net Total Return). They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for CSP1.L and 0.35% for PQVG.L.
Find the right allocation for CSP1.L and PQVG.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