CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

CUS1.L (iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc)) and IWFQ.L (iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS) are both exchange-traded funds - CUS1.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 TR USD, while IWFQ.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CUS1.L returned 10.62%/yr vs 12.21%/yr for IWFQ.L. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CUS1.L charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for IWFQ.L.

Performance

CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUS1.L) and iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CUS1.L achieves a 16.61% return, which is significantly higher than IWFQ.L's 10.34% return. Over the past 10 years, CUS1.L has underperformed IWFQ.L with an annualized return of 10.62%, while IWFQ.L has yielded a comparatively higher 12.21% annualized return.

CUS1.L

• 1D: -0.83%
• 1M: -1.64%
• 6M: 11.36%
• YTD: 16.61%
• 1Y: 28.75%
• 3Y*: 13.43%
• 5Y*: 8.04%
• 10Y*: 10.62%

IWFQ.L

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: 0.31%
• 6M: 8.68%
• YTD: 10.34%
• 1Y: 20.01%
• 3Y*: 15.88%
• 5Y*: 10.66%
• 10Y*: 12.21%

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

CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CUS1.L iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc)	16.61%	2.68%	11.54%	11.30%	-7.26%	19.95%	14.64%	22.34%	-6.43%	6.42%
IWFQ.L iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS	10.34%	7.40%	18.93%	19.15%	-9.55%	25.17%	10.93%	25.86%	-2.34%	12.47%

Correlation

The correlation between CUS1.L and IWFQ.L is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2014	0.80

The correlation between CUS1.L and IWFQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CUS1.L	IWFQ.L
Technology	19.8%	30.9%
Industrials	18.2%	10.5%
Financial Services	14.3%	15.4%
Healthcare	14.0%	9.3%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	9.2%
Real Estate	7.1%	1.6%
Energy	4.1%	3.4%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	4.9%
Basic Materials	3.4%	3.3%
Communication Services	2.9%	8.7%
Utilities	2.5%	2.6%

Return for Risk

CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CUS1.L

CUS1.L Risk / Return Rank: 77
CUS1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
CUS1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
CUS1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 67
CUS1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CUS1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 83

IWFQ.L

IWFQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
IWFQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
IWFQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
IWFQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 80
IWFQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
IWFQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUS1.L) and iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	CUS1.L	IWFQ.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	2.01	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.58	2.87	-0.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.37	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.45	2.84	+1.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.18	12.06	+1.12

CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CUS1.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the IWFQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CUS1.L and IWFQ.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.

Drawdowns

CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CUS1.L drawdown since its inception was -35.26%, smaller than the maximum IWFQ.L drawdown of -40.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUS1.L and IWFQ.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CUS1.L	IWFQ.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.26%	-40.49%	+5.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.44%	-7.01%	+0.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.89%	-20.20%	-8.69%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.89%	-20.20%	-8.69%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.26%	-23.91%	-11.35%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.61%	-0.89%	-3.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.33%	-8.92%	+2.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.18%	1.66%	+0.52%

Volatility

CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUS1.L) has a higher volatility of 4.97% compared to iShares MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS (IWFQ.L) at 2.57%. This indicates that CUS1.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWFQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CUS1.L	IWFQ.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.97%	2.57%	+2.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.07%	7.40%	+3.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.36%	9.91%	+5.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.87%	19.21%	+3.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.50%	17.26%	+4.24%

CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CUS1.L has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is higher than IWFQ.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

CUS1.L vs. IWFQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CUS1.L nor IWFQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CUS1.L and IWFQ.L in my portfolio?

CUS1.L and IWFQ.L have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CUS1.L or IWFQ.L?

On fees, IWFQ.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CUS1.L or IWFQ.L?

IWFQ.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for CUS1.L.

What is the main difference between CUS1.L and IWFQ.L?

CUS1.L is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while IWFQ.L is Global Equities. CUS1.L tracks Russell 2000 TR USD, while IWFQ.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for CUS1.L and 0.30% for IWFQ.L.