CSWG.L vs. CMB1.L

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

CSWG.L (Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF) and CMB1.L (iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both Europe Equities funds - CSWG.L tracks the MSCI Switzerland NR CHF while CMB1.L tracks the FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CSWG.L returned 7.19%/yr vs 17.17%/yr for CMB1.L. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CSWG.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CMB1.L.

Performance

CSWG.L vs. CMB1.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 iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.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 8.82% return, which is significantly lower than CMB1.L's 16.95% return. Over the past 10 years, CSWG.L has underperformed CMB1.L with an annualized return of 7.19%, while CMB1.L has yielded a comparatively higher 17.17% annualized return.

CSWG.L

• 1D: 1.47%
• 1M: 3.63%
• YTD: 8.82%
• 6M: 8.12%
• 1Y: 22.96%
• 3Y*: 12.00%
• 5Y*: 8.19%
• 10Y*: 7.19%

CMB1.L

• 1D: -0.98%
• 1M: 4.28%
• YTD: 16.95%
• 6M: 17.58%
• 1Y: 38.08%
• 3Y*: 29.90%
• 5Y*: 20.57%
• 10Y*: 17.17%

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

CSWG.L vs. CMB1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CSWG.L Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF	8.82%	23.37%	-0.59%	8.57%	-7.50%	19.77%	7.79%	26.88%	-26.62%	17.10%
CMB1.L iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc)	16.95%	43.83%	13.25%	30.68%	-3.56%	18.29%	1.52%	24.83%	-13.79%	22.48%

Correlation

The correlation between CSWG.L and CMB1.L is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.54
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2010	0.56

The correlation between CSWG.L and CMB1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

CSWG.L vs. CMB1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CSWG.L	CMB1.L
Healthcare	37.9%	1.1%
Financial Services	19.4%	47.2%
Consumer Defensive	14.3%	0.4%
Industrials	13.3%	11.1%
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	9.2%
Basic Materials	5.9%	0.5%
Energy	2.7%	7.2%
Communication Services	1.1%	1.8%
Technology	0.9%	6.0%
Real Estate	0.7%	0.3%
Utilities	0.2%	15.3%

Return for Risk

CSWG.L vs. CMB1.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: 52
CSWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
CSWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
CSWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 61
CSWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
CSWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 41

CMB1.L

CMB1.L Risk / Return Rank: 83
CMB1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
CMB1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
CMB1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CMB1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
CMB1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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. CMB1.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 iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.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.

	CSWG.L	CMB1.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	2.52	-0.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	3.39	-0.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.44	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.83	3.67	-1.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.83	13.44	-7.61

CSWG.L vs. CMB1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSWG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is lower than the CMB1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSWG.L and CMB1.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

CSWG.L vs. CMB1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSWG.L drawdown since its inception was -33.48%, smaller than the maximum CMB1.L drawdown of -56.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSWG.L and CMB1.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSWG.L	CMB1.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.48%	-56.05%	+22.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.52%	-10.32%	-2.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.52%	-15.62%	+3.10%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.26%	-24.19%	+7.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.48%	-36.61%	+3.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-2.87%	+2.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.70%	-15.21%	+8.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.93%	2.83%	+1.10%

Volatility

CSWG.L vs. CMB1.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF (CSWG.L) and iShares FTSE MIB UCITS ETF (Acc) (CMB1.L) have volatilities of 3.88% and 4.06%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	CSWG.L	CMB1.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.88%	4.06%	-0.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.53%	12.41%	-1.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.04%	15.11%	-2.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.03%	18.01%	-4.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.86%	20.12%	-4.26%

CSWG.L vs. CMB1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSWG.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CMB1.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSWG.L vs. CMB1.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CSWG.L nor CMB1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CSWG.L and CMB1.L in my portfolio?

CSWG.L and CMB1.L have a correlation of 0.51, 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 CMB1.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 CMB1.L?

CSWG.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CMB1.L.

What is the main difference between CSWG.L and CMB1.L?

CSWG.L tracks MSCI Switzerland NR CHF, while CMB1.L tracks FTSE Italia AllShare TR EUR. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for CSWG.L and 0.33% for CMB1.L.