CUKS.L vs. MIDD.L
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares MSCI UK Small Cap UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUKS.L) and iShares FTSE 250 UCITS ETF (MIDD.L).
CUKS.L and MIDD.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CUKS.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the FTSE Small Cap Ex Invest Trust TR GBP. It was launched on Jul 1, 2009. MIDD.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the FTSE 250 Ex Investment Trust TR GBP. It was launched on Mar 26, 2004. Both CUKS.L and MIDD.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: CUKS.L or MIDD.L.
Key characteristics
| CUKS.L | MIDD.L | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 5.21% | 6.02% |
| 1Y Return | 17.65% | 16.59% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -3.85% | -2.15% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 0.86% | 2.29% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 4.73% | 5.02% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.03 | 1.02 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.48 | 1.49 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.18 | 1.18 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.52 | 0.62 |
| Martin Ratio | 5.38 | 5.06 |
| Ulcer Index | 2.54% | 2.49% |
| Daily Std Dev | 13.73% | 12.81% |
| Max Drawdown | -42.42% | -51.66% |
| Current Drawdown | -14.98% | -8.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between CUKS.L and MIDD.L is 0.85, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
CUKS.L vs. MIDD.L - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, CUKS.L achieves a 5.21% return, which is significantly lower than MIDD.L's 6.02% return. Over the past 10 years, CUKS.L has underperformed MIDD.L with an annualized return of 4.73%, while MIDD.L has yielded a comparatively higher 5.02% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CUKS.L vs. MIDD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CUKS.L has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than MIDD.L's 0.40% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
CUKS.L vs. MIDD.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI UK Small Cap UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUKS.L) and iShares FTSE 250 UCITS ETF (MIDD.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.
Dividends
CUKS.L vs. MIDD.L - Dividend Comparison
CUKS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MIDD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.13%.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CUKS.L iShares MSCI UK Small Cap UCITS ETF (Acc) | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MIDD.L iShares FTSE 250 UCITS ETF | 3.13% | 3.17% | 2.76% | 2.01% | 1.51% | 2.72% | 3.07% | 2.80% | 2.67% | 2.80% | 2.54% | 2.25% |
Drawdowns
CUKS.L vs. MIDD.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CUKS.L drawdown since its inception was -42.42%, smaller than the maximum MIDD.L drawdown of -51.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUKS.L and MIDD.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
CUKS.L vs. MIDD.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI UK Small Cap UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUKS.L) and iShares FTSE 250 UCITS ETF (MIDD.L) have volatilities of 4.66% and 4.78%, 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.