CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CSWG.L (Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF) and ACWL.L (Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CSWG.L is a Europe Equities fund tracking the MSCI Switzerland NR CHF, while ACWL.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CSWG.L returned 9.94%/yr vs 13.73%/yr for ACWL.L. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CSWG.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for ACWL.L.

Performance

CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF (CSWG.L) and Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSWG.L achieves a 2.34% return, which is significantly lower than ACWL.L's 12.44% return. Over the past 10 years, CSWG.L has underperformed ACWL.L with an annualized return of 9.94%, while ACWL.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.73% annualized return.

CSWG.L

• 1D: -0.90%
• 1M: 0.67%
• YTD: 2.34%
• 6M: 5.27%
• 1Y: 15.19%
• 3Y*: 8.64%
• 5Y*: 7.57%
• 10Y*: 9.94%

ACWL.L

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 6.05%
• YTD: 12.44%
• 6M: 12.71%
• 1Y: 30.24%
• 3Y*: 18.94%
• 5Y*: 12.39%
• 10Y*: 13.73%

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

CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CSWG.L Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF	2.34%	23.70%	-0.86%	8.57%	-7.50%	19.38%	6.91%	29.09%	-2.83%	15.62%
ACWL.L Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF	12.44%	13.63%	21.43%	13.09%	-8.59%	20.41%	9.74%	18.01%	2.02%	11.14%

Correlation

The correlation between CSWG.L and ACWL.L is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.23
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.22
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 17, 2016	0.18

The correlation between CSWG.L and ACWL.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.18 (all time) to 0.29 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CSWG.L	ACWL.L
Healthcare	38.2%	8.1%
Financial Services	19.7%	16.2%
Consumer Defensive	14.7%	5.0%
Industrials	13.1%	10.9%
Basic Materials	5.8%	3.7%
Consumer Cyclical	5.7%	9.3%
Energy	2.7%	4.2%
Communication Services	1.1%	9.0%
Technology	0.8%	29.3%
Real Estate	0.7%	1.8%
Utilities	0.2%	2.6%

Return for Risk

CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSWG.L

CSWG.L Risk / Return Rank: 31
CSWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
CSWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
CSWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 34
CSWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
CSWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 28

ACWL.L

ACWL.L Risk / Return Rank: 87
ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
ACWL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
ACWL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
ACWL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
ACWL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF (CSWG.L) and Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.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.

	CSWG.L	ACWL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.22	3.06	-1.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.75	4.15	-2.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.59	-0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.24	4.26	-3.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.99	17.67	-13.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSWG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is lower than the ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSWG.L and ACWL.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

	CSWG.L	ACWL.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.22	3.06	-1.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.64	1.90	-1.26
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	1.02	2.61	-1.59
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.03	2.36	-1.33

Drawdowns

CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSWG.L drawdown since its inception was -18.31%, roughly equal to the maximum ACWL.L drawdown of -18.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSWG.L and ACWL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSWG.L	ACWL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.31%	-18.15%	-0.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.52%	-7.06%	-5.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.52%	-18.15%	+5.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.26%	-18.15%	+1.89%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-18.31%	-18.15%	-0.16%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.01%	-0.29%	-5.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.18%	-2.44%	-1.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.85%	1.71%	+2.14%

Volatility

CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF (CSWG.L) has a higher volatility of 3.86% compared to Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L) at 2.64%. This indicates that CSWG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CSWG.L	ACWL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.86%	2.64%	+1.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.30%	7.02%	+3.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.69%	9.88%	+2.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.26%	16.54%	-2.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.57%	23.34%	-4.77%

CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSWG.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWL.L's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSWG.L vs. ACWL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CSWG.L nor ACWL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

CSWG.L and ACWL.L have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CSWG.L or ACWL.L?

On fees, CSWG.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CSWG.L or ACWL.L?

CSWG.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for ACWL.L.

What is the main difference between CSWG.L and ACWL.L?

CSWG.L is categorized as Europe Equities, while ACWL.L is Global Equities. CSWG.L tracks MSCI Switzerland NR CHF, while ACWL.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for CSWG.L and 0.45% for ACWL.L.