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

Performance

CU2G.L vs. XMVU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD (CU2G.L) and Xtrackers MSCI USA Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF 1D (XMVU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CU2G.L achieves a 12.15% return, which is significantly higher than XMVU.L's 2.63% 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%

XMVU.L

1D
0.45%
1M
2.94%
YTD
2.63%
6M
2.39%
1Y
5.61%
3Y*
8.98%
5Y*
8.41%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CU2G.L
Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD
12.15%6.37%21.31%20.11%-10.63%29.15%16.42%26.58%-0.32%10.75%
XMVU.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF 1D
2.63%0.25%17.70%4.30%1.22%22.78%1.32%20.17%4.68%8.23%

Correlation

The correlation between CU2G.L and XMVU.L is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.37

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

0.59

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

0.67

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2016

0.74

Over the past year, the correlation between CU2G.L and XMVU.L has dropped to 0.37 - well below their long-term average of 0.74, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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


Sectors
CU2G.L
XMVU.L

Technology

29.4%
29.6%

Healthcare

13.0%
12.7%

Financial Services

11.7%
13.7%

Consumer Cyclical

11.0%
6.4%

Communication Services

8.8%
6.0%

Industrials

8.4%
6.2%

Consumer Defensive

6.3%
10.0%

Energy

4.4%
3.5%

Real Estate

2.5%
2.2%

Utilities

2.3%
7.6%

Basic Materials

2.3%
2.2%

Technology

CU2G.L
29.4%
XMVU.L
29.6%

Healthcare

CU2G.L
13.0%
XMVU.L
12.7%

Financial Services

CU2G.L
11.7%
XMVU.L
13.7%

Consumer Cyclical

CU2G.L
11.0%
XMVU.L
6.4%

Communication Services

CU2G.L
8.8%
XMVU.L
6.0%

Industrials

CU2G.L
8.4%
XMVU.L
6.2%

Consumer Defensive

CU2G.L
6.3%
XMVU.L
10.0%

Energy

CU2G.L
4.4%
XMVU.L
3.5%

Real Estate

CU2G.L
2.5%
XMVU.L
2.2%

Utilities

CU2G.L
2.3%
XMVU.L
7.6%

Basic Materials

CU2G.L
2.3%
XMVU.L
2.2%

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. XMVU.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

XMVU.L
XMVU.L Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
XMVU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMVU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMVU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
XMVU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMVU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
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. XMVU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD (CU2G.L) and Xtrackers MSCI USA Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF 1D (XMVU.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.LXMVU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.84

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.10

+0.34

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.86

1.10

+1.76

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.34

2.65

+7.69

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

The current CU2G.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is higher than the XMVU.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CU2G.L and XMVU.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.LXMVU.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.43

0.59

+1.84

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

0.69

+0.20

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

0.65

+0.35

Drawdowns

CU2G.L vs. XMVU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CU2G.L drawdown since its inception was -25.96%, roughly equal to the maximum XMVU.L drawdown of -24.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CU2G.L and XMVU.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CU2G.LXMVU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.96%

-24.94%

-1.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.93%

-5.07%

-4.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.81%

-11.48%

-10.33%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.81%

-11.48%

-10.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.01%

-2.78%

+2.77%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.66%

-4.01%

+0.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.76%

2.11%

+0.65%

Volatility

CU2G.L vs. XMVU.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD (CU2G.L) and Xtrackers MSCI USA Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF 1D (XMVU.L) have volatilities of 3.21% and 3.34%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CU2G.LXMVU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.21%

3.34%

-0.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.38%

7.14%

+1.24%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.78%

9.48%

+2.30%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.57%

12.13%

+2.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.76%

13.83%

+1.93%

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

CU2G.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than XMVU.L's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, 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. XMVU.L - Dividend Comparison

CU2G.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XMVU.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CU2G.L
Amundi MSCI USA UCITS USD
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XMVU.L
Xtrackers MSCI USA Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF 1D
1.18%1.24%1.31%1.33%1.82%1.27%1.81%

Frequently Asked Questions


CU2G.L and XMVU.L have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CU2G.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CU2G.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for XMVU.L.

Both ETFs track Russell 1000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for CU2G.L and 0.20% for XMVU.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CU2G.L and XMVU.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