CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CU2G.L (Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD) and BBSU.L (JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds tracking the Russell 1000 TR USD, from Amundi and JPMorgan respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CU2G.L returned 13.05%/yr vs 14.48%/yr for BBSU.L. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. CU2G.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for BBSU.L.

Performance

CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD (CU2G.L) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc) (BBSU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CU2G.L achieves a 12.15% return, which is significantly higher than BBSU.L's 10.23% return.

CU2G.L

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 8.13%
• YTD: 12.15%
• 6M: 12.93%
• 1Y: 28.55%
• 3Y*: 16.92%
• 5Y*: 13.05%
• 10Y*: 15.40%

BBSU.L

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 5.92%
• YTD: 10.23%
• 6M: 10.11%
• 1Y: 28.53%
• 3Y*: 19.35%
• 5Y*: 14.48%
• 10Y*: —

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

CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CU2G.L Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD	12.15%	6.37%	21.31%	20.11%	-10.63%	29.15%	16.42%	11.92%
BBSU.L JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc)	10.23%	9.39%	27.19%	20.71%	-10.46%	29.25%	16.07%	11.91%

Correlation

The correlation between CU2G.L and BBSU.L is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2019	0.97

The correlation between CU2G.L and BBSU.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.82 (1 year) to 0.97 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CU2G.L	BBSU.L
Technology	29.4%	35.4%
Healthcare	13.0%	8.6%
Financial Services	11.7%	11.8%
Consumer Cyclical	11.0%	10.1%
Communication Services	8.8%	11.5%
Industrials	8.4%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	6.3%	4.8%
Energy	4.4%	3.6%
Real Estate	2.5%	1.8%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Basic Materials	2.3%	1.7%

Return for Risk

CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CU2G.L

CU2G.L Risk / Return Rank: 68
CU2G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
CU2G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
CU2G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 75
CU2G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
CU2G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 59

BBSU.L

BBSU.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
BBSU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
BBSU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
BBSU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 83
BBSU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
BBSU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD (CU2G.L) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc) (BBSU.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.

	CU2G.L	BBSU.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.43	2.70	-0.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.22	3.59	-0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.50	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.86	3.64	-0.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.34	12.70	-2.36
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CU2G.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is comparable to the BBSU.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CU2G.L and BBSU.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

	CU2G.L	BBSU.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.43	2.70	-0.27
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90	1.00	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.98	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.00	0.96	+0.05

Drawdowns

CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CU2G.L drawdown since its inception was -25.96%, roughly equal to the maximum BBSU.L drawdown of -25.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CU2G.L and BBSU.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CU2G.L	BBSU.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.96%	-25.80%	-0.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.93%	-7.80%	-2.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.81%	-21.42%	-0.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.81%	-21.42%	-0.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.96%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.01%	-0.24%	+0.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.66%	-3.73%	+0.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.76%	2.24%	+0.52%

Volatility

CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD (CU2G.L) has a higher volatility of 3.21% compared to JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc) (BBSU.L) at 2.63%. This indicates that CU2G.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BBSU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CU2G.L	BBSU.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.21%	2.63%	+0.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.38%	7.21%	+1.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.78%	10.61%	+1.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.57%	14.45%	+0.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.76%	16.11%	-0.35%

CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CU2G.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than BBSU.L's 0.05% 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

CU2G.L vs. BBSU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CU2G.L nor BBSU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CU2G.L and BBSU.L in my portfolio?

CU2G.L and BBSU.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CU2G.L or BBSU.L?

On fees, BBSU.L is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CU2G.L or BBSU.L?

BBSU.L is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for CU2G.L.

What is the main difference between CU2G.L and BBSU.L?

Both ETFs track Russell 1000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for CU2G.L and 0.05% for BBSU.L.