PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CU2G.L vs. PACW.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CU2G.L vs. PACW.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD (CU2G.L) and Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CU2G.L is traded in GBp, while PACW.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the PACW.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with CU2G.L having a 12.15% return and PACW.L slightly lower at 11.96%.


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%

PACW.L

1D
-0.43%
1M
5.84%
YTD
11.96%
6M
12.58%
1Y
30.63%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)2025
CU2G.L
Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD
12.15%4.59%
PACW.L
Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income
11.96%9.58%

Correlation

The correlation between CU2G.L and PACW.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 (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2025

0.86

The correlation between CU2G.L and PACW.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

CU2G.L vs. PACW.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: 6868
Overall Rank
CU2G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CU2G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
CU2G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
CU2G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
CU2G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank

PACW.L
PACW.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
PACW.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PACW.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
PACW.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
PACW.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
PACW.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD (CU2G.L) and Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.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.LPACW.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.50

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.77

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.56

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.86

4.32

-1.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.34

17.62

-7.28

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

The current CU2G.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is comparable to the PACW.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CU2G.L and PACW.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


CU2G.LPACW.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.43

2.93

-0.50

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

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

1.24

-0.24

Drawdowns

CU2G.L vs. PACW.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CU2G.L drawdown since its inception was -25.96%, which is greater than PACW.L's maximum drawdown of -17.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CU2G.L and PACW.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CU2G.LPACW.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.96%

-17.68%

-8.28%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.93%

-7.06%

-2.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.01%

-0.43%

+0.42%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.66%

-3.03%

-0.63%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.76%

1.73%

+1.03%

Volatility

CU2G.L vs. PACW.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD (CU2G.L) has a higher volatility of 3.21% compared to Amundi Prime All Country World UCITS ETF Income (PACW.L) at 2.93%. This indicates that CU2G.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PACW.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CU2G.LPACW.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.21%

2.93%

+0.28%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.38%

7.75%

+0.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.78%

10.45%

+1.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.57%

13.93%

+0.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.76%

13.93%

+1.83%

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

CU2G.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than PACW.L's 0.07% 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. PACW.L - Dividend Comparison

CU2G.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PACW.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%.


Frequently Asked Questions


CU2G.L and PACW.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.

On fees, PACW.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

PACW.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for CU2G.L.

CU2G.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while PACW.L is Global Equities. CU2G.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while PACW.L tracks Solactive GBS Global Markets Large & Mid Cap Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for CU2G.L and 0.07% for PACW.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CU2G.L and PACW.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