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

Performance

CSWG.L vs. MWRD.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 Index MSCI World (MWRD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

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%

MWRD.L

1D
1M
YTD
6M
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CSWG.L
Amundi MSCI Switzerland UCITS ETF CHF
3.71%23.70%-0.86%8.57%-7.50%19.38%6.91%29.09%-2.83%-2.01%
MWRD.L
Amundi Index MSCI World
0.00%0.00%-1.27%17.50%-9.18%24.39%11.85%23.29%-4.10%6.52%

Correlation

The correlation between CSWG.L and MWRD.L is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.12

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

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2017

0.30

The correlation between CSWG.L and MWRD.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.12 (3 years) to 0.34 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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


Sectors
CSWG.L
MWRD.L

Healthcare

38.2%
12.4%

Financial Services

19.7%
14.7%

Consumer Defensive

14.7%
6.7%

Industrials

13.1%
10.6%

Basic Materials

5.8%
3.8%

Consumer Cyclical

5.7%
10.5%

Energy

2.7%
4.4%

Communication Services

1.1%
7.5%

Technology

0.8%
24.7%

Real Estate

0.7%
2.4%

Utilities

0.2%
2.4%

Healthcare

CSWG.L
38.2%
MWRD.L
12.4%

Financial Services

CSWG.L
19.7%
MWRD.L
14.7%

Consumer Defensive

CSWG.L
14.7%
MWRD.L
6.7%

Industrials

CSWG.L
13.1%
MWRD.L
10.6%

Basic Materials

CSWG.L
5.8%
MWRD.L
3.8%

Consumer Cyclical

CSWG.L
5.7%
MWRD.L
10.5%

Energy

CSWG.L
2.7%
MWRD.L
4.4%

Communication Services

CSWG.L
1.1%
MWRD.L
7.5%

Technology

CSWG.L
0.8%
MWRD.L
24.7%

Real Estate

CSWG.L
0.7%
MWRD.L
2.4%

Utilities

CSWG.L
0.2%
MWRD.L
2.4%

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. MWRD.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: 3333
Overall Rank
CSWG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSWG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSWG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
CSWG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSWG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank

MWRD.L
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. MWRD.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 Index MSCI World (MWRD.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.LMWRD.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.30

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.16

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


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CSWG.LMWRD.LDifference

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

CSWG.L vs. MWRD.L - Drawdown Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CSWG.LMWRD.LDifference

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

CSWG.L vs. MWRD.L - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CSWG.LMWRD.LDifference

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. MWRD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSWG.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than MWRD.L's 0.08% 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. MWRD.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CSWG.L and MWRD.L have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MWRD.L is cheaper at 0.08% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MWRD.L is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for CSWG.L.

CSWG.L is categorized as Europe Equities, while MWRD.L is Global Equities. CSWG.L tracks MSCI Switzerland NR CHF, while MWRD.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for CSWG.L and 0.08% for MWRD.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CSWG.L and MWRD.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