PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CUS1.L vs. SGLP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CUS1.L vs. SGLP.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 Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.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 16.61% return, which is significantly higher than SGLP.L's -6.33% return. Over the past 10 years, CUS1.L has underperformed SGLP.L with an annualized return of 10.62%, while SGLP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 11.36% 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%

SGLP.L

1D
-1.60%
1M
-7.47%
6M
-12.71%
YTD
-6.33%
1Y
20.56%
3Y*
26.02%
5Y*
17.81%
10Y*
11.36%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
SGLP.L
Invesco Physical Gold A
-6.33%53.60%28.14%7.26%11.83%-2.88%19.99%14.65%4.31%1.64%

Correlation

The correlation between CUS1.L and SGLP.L is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.22

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

0.08

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

0.02

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

0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2009

0.05

The correlation between CUS1.L and SGLP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.02 (5 years) to 0.22 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

CUS1.L vs. SGLP.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: 7777
Overall Rank
CUS1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

SGLP.L
SGLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SGLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
SGLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
SGLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
SGLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
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. SGLP.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 Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.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.LSGLP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.37

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.17

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.45

0.84

+3.60

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.18

2.08

+11.09

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

The current CUS1.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is higher than the SGLP.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CUS1.L and SGLP.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...

Drawdowns

CUS1.L vs. SGLP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CUS1.L drawdown since its inception was -35.26%, smaller than the maximum SGLP.L drawdown of -63.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUS1.L and SGLP.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CUS1.LSGLP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.26%

-63.75%

+28.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.44%

-24.29%

+17.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.89%

-24.29%

-4.60%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.89%

-24.29%

-4.60%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.26%

-24.29%

-10.97%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.61%

-24.29%

+19.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.33%

-31.67%

+25.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.18%

9.84%

-7.66%

Volatility

CUS1.L vs. SGLP.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUS1.L) is 4.97%, while Invesco Physical Gold A (SGLP.L) has a volatility of 6.71%. This indicates that CUS1.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SGLP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CUS1.LSGLP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.97%

6.71%

-1.74%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.07%

21.07%

-10.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.36%

24.32%

-8.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.87%

21.89%

+0.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.50%

18.29%

+3.21%

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

CUS1.L has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is higher than SGLP.L's 0.12% expense ratio.


Dividends

CUS1.L vs. SGLP.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CUS1.L and SGLP.L have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, SGLP.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

SGLP.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for CUS1.L.

CUS1.L is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while SGLP.L is Gold. CUS1.L tracks Russell 2000 TR USD, while SGLP.L tracks Gold. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for CUS1.L and 0.12% for SGLP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CUS1.L and SGLP.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