PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CSWG.L vs. ANXU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CSWG.L vs. ANXU.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 Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSWG.L achieves a 2.34% return, which is significantly lower than ANXU.L's 20.95% return. Over the past 10 years, CSWG.L has underperformed ANXU.L with an annualized return of 9.94%, while ANXU.L has yielded a comparatively higher 22.81% 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%

ANXU.L

1D
0.19%
1M
11.63%
YTD
20.95%
6M
19.35%
1Y
43.02%
3Y*
25.53%
5Y*
19.21%
10Y*
22.81%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
ANXU.L
Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD
20.95%11.32%28.95%48.68%-25.30%28.68%41.33%36.74%4.00%20.61%

Correlation

The correlation between CSWG.L and ANXU.L is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.15

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.18

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.25

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 9, 2016

0.24

The correlation between CSWG.L and ANXU.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.15 (1 year) to 0.27 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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


Sectors
CSWG.L
ANXU.L

Healthcare

38.2%
4.2%

Financial Services

19.7%
0.2%

Consumer Defensive

14.7%
7.7%

Industrials

13.1%
3.1%

Basic Materials

5.8%
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

5.7%
12.2%

Energy

2.7%
0.6%

Communication Services

1.1%
15.8%

Technology

0.8%
53.7%

Real Estate

0.7%
0.1%

Utilities

0.2%
1.4%

Healthcare

CSWG.L
38.2%
ANXU.L
4.2%

Financial Services

CSWG.L
19.7%
ANXU.L
0.2%

Consumer Defensive

CSWG.L
14.7%
ANXU.L
7.7%

Industrials

CSWG.L
13.1%
ANXU.L
3.1%

Basic Materials

CSWG.L
5.8%
ANXU.L
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

CSWG.L
5.7%
ANXU.L
12.2%

Energy

CSWG.L
2.7%
ANXU.L
0.6%

Communication Services

CSWG.L
1.1%
ANXU.L
15.8%

Technology

CSWG.L
0.8%
ANXU.L
53.7%

Real Estate

CSWG.L
0.7%
ANXU.L
0.1%

Utilities

CSWG.L
0.2%
ANXU.L
1.4%

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

CSWG.L vs. ANXU.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: 3131
Overall Rank
CSWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
CSWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank

ANXU.L
ANXU.L Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
ANXU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ANXU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
ANXU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
ANXU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
ANXU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank
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. ANXU.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 Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXU.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.LANXU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.47

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.82

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.48

-0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.24

3.85

-2.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.99

10.89

-6.90

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

The current CSWG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is lower than the ANXU.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSWG.L and ANXU.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CSWG.LANXU.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.22

2.69

-1.47

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

0.96

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.02

1.23

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.03

1.30

-0.27

Drawdowns

CSWG.L vs. ANXU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSWG.L drawdown since its inception was -18.31%, smaller than the maximum ANXU.L drawdown of -27.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSWG.L and ANXU.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CSWG.LANXU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.31%

-27.52%

+9.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.52%

-11.12%

-1.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.52%

-24.28%

+11.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.26%

-27.52%

+11.26%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.31%

-27.52%

+9.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.01%

0.00%

-6.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.18%

-5.00%

+0.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.85%

3.94%

-0.09%

Volatility

CSWG.L vs. ANXU.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF (CSWG.L) is 3.86%, while Amundi Nasdaq-100 UCITS USD (ANXU.L) has a volatility of 5.06%. This indicates that CSWG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ANXU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CSWG.LANXU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.86%

5.06%

-1.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.30%

11.74%

-1.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.69%

15.96%

-3.27%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.26%

20.09%

-5.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.57%

21.15%

-2.58%

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

CSWG.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than ANXU.L's 0.13% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

CSWG.L vs. ANXU.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CSWG.L and ANXU.L have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ANXU.L is cheaper at 0.13% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ANXU.L is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for CSWG.L.

CSWG.L is categorized as Europe Equities, while ANXU.L is Nasdaq-100. CSWG.L tracks MSCI Switzerland NR CHF, while ANXU.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for CSWG.L and 0.13% for ANXU.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CSWG.L and ANXU.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