CSWG.L vs. MMS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CSWG.L (Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF) and MMS.L (Lyxor MSCI EMU Small Cap (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist) are both Europe Equities funds from Amundi - CSWG.L tracks the MSCI Switzerland NR CHF while MMS.L tracks the MSCI EMU Small Cap NR EUR. Both are passively managed. CSWG.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for MMS.L.

Performance

CSWG.L vs. MMS.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 EMU Small Cap (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist (MMS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

CSWG.L

• 1D: 1.34%
• 1M: 2.57%
• YTD: 3.71%
• 6M: 6.61%
• 1Y: 15.88%
• 3Y*: 9.05%
• 5Y*: 7.85%
• 10Y*: 10.09%

MMS.L

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CSWG.L Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF	3.71%	23.70%	1.32%
MMS.L Lyxor MSCI EMU Small Cap (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

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

Sectors	CSWG.L	MMS.L
Healthcare	38.2%	7.7%
Financial Services	19.7%	16.9%
Consumer Defensive	14.7%	1.7%
Industrials	13.1%	21.8%
Basic Materials	5.8%	5.9%
Consumer Cyclical	5.7%	10.9%
Energy	2.7%	5.6%
Communication Services	1.1%	3.0%
Technology	0.8%	10.3%
Real Estate	0.7%	12.8%
Utilities	0.2%	3.4%

Return for Risk

CSWG.L vs. MMS.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: 33
CSWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
CSWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
CSWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 36
CSWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
CSWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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. MMS.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 EMU Small Cap (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist (MMS.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	MMS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.27	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.82	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.30	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.16	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CSWG.L	MMS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.27	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	1.03	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.05	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	CSWG.L	MMS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.31%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.52%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.52%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.26%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-18.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.76%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.18%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.86%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CSWG.L	MMS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.02%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.38%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.75%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.27%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.57%	—	—

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

CSWG.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than MMS.L's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSWG.L vs. MMS.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

CSWG.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for MMS.L.

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

CSWG.L tracks MSCI Switzerland NR CHF, while MMS.L tracks MSCI EMU Small Cap NR EUR. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for CSWG.L and 0.40% for MMS.L.