PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CUS1.L vs. RTWP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CUS1.L vs. RTWP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CUS1.L (iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc)) and RTWP.L (L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds tracking the Russell 2000 TR USD, from iShares and Legal & General respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CUS1.L returned 11.83%/yr vs 12.05%/yr for RTWP.L. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CUS1.L charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for RTWP.L.

Performance

CUS1.L vs. RTWP.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 L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CUS1.L achieves a 15.99% return, which is significantly lower than RTWP.L's 16.93% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CUS1.L having a 11.83% annualized return and RTWP.L not far ahead at 12.05%.

CUS1.L

1D
1.06%
1M
4.90%
YTD
15.99%
6M
15.37%
1Y
35.71%
3Y*
13.68%
5Y*
7.82%
10Y*
11.83%

RTWP.L

1D
1.41%
1M
4.16%
YTD
16.93%
6M
15.64%
1Y
36.63%
3Y*
14.81%
5Y*
8.43%
10Y*
12.05%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CUS1.L
iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc)		15.99%2.68%11.54%11.30%-7.26%19.95%14.64%22.34%-6.43%6.42%
RTWP.L
L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF		16.93%3.61%11.18%13.44%-8.94%20.68%15.78%20.59%-7.77%4.46%

Correlation

The correlation between CUS1.L and RTWP.L is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

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

0.97

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

0.96

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

0.97

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2010

0.90

The correlation between CUS1.L and RTWP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
CUS1.L
RTWP.L

Industrials

19.6%
17.9%

Technology

16.8%
20.0%

Financial Services

15.1%
15.3%

Healthcare

12.6%
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

10.5%
8.6%

Real Estate

7.0%
5.9%

Energy

5.6%
5.3%

Consumer Defensive

3.9%
2.7%

Basic Materials

3.9%
4.6%

Utilities

2.7%
2.8%

Communication Services

2.5%
2.4%

Industrials

CUS1.L
19.6%
RTWP.L
17.9%

Technology

CUS1.L
16.8%
RTWP.L
20.0%

Financial Services

CUS1.L
15.1%
RTWP.L
15.3%

Healthcare

CUS1.L
12.6%
RTWP.L
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

CUS1.L
10.5%
RTWP.L
8.6%

Real Estate

CUS1.L
7.0%
RTWP.L
5.9%

Energy

CUS1.L
5.6%
RTWP.L
5.3%

Consumer Defensive

CUS1.L
3.9%
RTWP.L
2.7%

Basic Materials

CUS1.L
3.9%
RTWP.L
4.6%

Utilities

CUS1.L
2.7%
RTWP.L
2.8%

Communication Services

CUS1.L
2.5%
RTWP.L
2.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc)

L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF

Often compared with CUS1.L:
CUS1.L vs. WLDS.LCUS1.L vs. AVUVCUS1.L vs. R2SC.LCUS1.L vs. CSPX.LCUS1.L vs. AMZNCUS1.L vs. USSC.LCUS1.L vs. VIOG
Often compared with RTWP.L:
RTWP.L vs. IWMRTWP.L vs. ^GSPCRTWP.L vs. R2SC.LRTWP.L vs. FESMRTWP.L vs. SPY4.DERTWP.L vs. VWRL.ASRTWP.L vs. AVUV

Return for Risk

CUS1.L vs. RTWP.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: 7878
Overall Rank
CUS1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
RTWP.L
RTWP.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
RTWP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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.

CUS1.L vs. RTWP.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 L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.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.

CUS1.LRTWP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.40
2.34

+0.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.25
3.18

+0.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.39

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.52

4.93

+0.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.02

14.84

+2.18

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current CUS1.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the RTWP.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CUS1.L and RTWP.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

CUS1.LRTWP.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.40

2.34

+0.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

0.44

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

0.59

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.71

0.70

+0.01

Drawdowns

CUS1.L vs. RTWP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CUS1.L drawdown since its inception was -35.26%, roughly equal to the maximum RTWP.L drawdown of -35.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUS1.L and RTWP.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CUS1.LRTWP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.26%

-35.32%

+0.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.44%

-7.40%

+0.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.89%

-28.77%

-0.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.89%

-28.77%

-0.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.26%

-35.32%

+0.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.38%

-7.05%

+0.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.09%

2.46%

-0.37%

Volatility

CUS1.L vs. RTWP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUS1.L) is 3.89%, while L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.L) has a volatility of 4.55%. This indicates that CUS1.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RTWP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CUS1.LRTWP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.89%

4.55%

-0.66%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.97%

10.96%

-0.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.81%

15.61%

-0.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.85%

19.25%

-0.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.56%

20.40%

-0.84%

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

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

Dividends

CUS1.L vs. RTWP.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.97, CUS1.L and RTWP.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

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

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

Both ETFs track Russell 2000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for CUS1.L and 0.30% for RTWP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CUS1.L and RTWP.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