PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CUKS.L vs. MMS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CUKS.L vs. MMS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI UK Small Cap UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUKS.L) and Lyxor MSCI EMU Small Cap (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist (MMS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period


CUKS.L

1D
0.83%
1M
3.18%
YTD
3.10%
6M
5.37%
1Y
10.62%
3Y*
9.93%
5Y*
1.23%
10Y*
4.74%

MMS.L

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

CUKS.L vs. MMS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
CUKS.L
iShares MSCI UK Small Cap UCITS ETF (Acc)
3.10%14.90%9.13%
MMS.L
Lyxor MSCI EMU Small Cap (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist
0.00%0.00%0.00%

CUKS.L vs. MMS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CUKS.L
MMS.L

Financial Services

24.0%
16.9%

Industrials

21.1%
21.8%

Consumer Cyclical

15.3%
10.9%

Real Estate

9.0%
12.8%

Basic Materials

6.6%
5.9%

Communication Services

6.2%
3.0%

Technology

4.2%
10.3%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
1.7%

Energy

3.3%
5.6%

Healthcare

3.3%
7.7%

Utilities

3.0%
3.4%

Financial Services

CUKS.L
24.0%
MMS.L
16.9%

Industrials

CUKS.L
21.1%
MMS.L
21.8%

Consumer Cyclical

CUKS.L
15.3%
MMS.L
10.9%

Real Estate

CUKS.L
9.0%
MMS.L
12.8%

Basic Materials

CUKS.L
6.6%
MMS.L
5.9%

Communication Services

CUKS.L
6.2%
MMS.L
3.0%

Technology

CUKS.L
4.2%
MMS.L
10.3%

Consumer Defensive

CUKS.L
4.1%
MMS.L
1.7%

Energy

CUKS.L
3.3%
MMS.L
5.6%

Healthcare

CUKS.L
3.3%
MMS.L
7.7%

Utilities

CUKS.L
3.0%
MMS.L
3.4%

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

CUKS.L vs. MMS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CUKS.L
CUKS.L Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
CUKS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CUKS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
CUKS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
CUKS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
CUKS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank

MMS.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.

CUKS.L vs. MMS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI UK Small Cap UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUKS.L) and Lyxor MSCI EMU Small Cap (DR) UCITS ETF - Dist (MMS.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.


CUKS.LMMS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.86

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.79

CUKS.L vs. MMS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CUKS.LMMS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.79

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.47

Drawdowns

CUKS.L vs. MMS.L - Drawdown Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CUKS.LMMS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.28%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.88%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.63%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.80%

Volatility

CUKS.L vs. MMS.L - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CUKS.LMMS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.40%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.02%

CUKS.L vs. MMS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CUKS.L has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than MMS.L's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

CUKS.L vs. MMS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CUKS.L nor MMS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


On fees, MMS.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MMS.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for CUKS.L.

CUKS.L tracks FTSE Small Cap Ex Invest Trust TR GBP, while MMS.L tracks MSCI EMU Small Cap NR EUR. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for CUKS.L and 0.40% for MMS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CUKS.L and MMS.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