PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi Index Barclays Global Agg 500M (GAGG.L) and Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP (CSH2.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GAGG.L achieves a 0.08% return, which is significantly lower than CSH2.L's 1.74% return.


GAGG.L

1D
0.15%
1M
0.76%
YTD
0.08%
6M
-0.17%
1Y
3.55%
3Y*
0.64%
5Y*
-0.76%
10Y*

CSH2.L

1D
0.03%
1M
0.35%
YTD
1.74%
6M
2.06%
1Y
4.37%
3Y*
5.01%
5Y*
3.66%
10Y*
2.07%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GAGG.L
Amundi Index Barclays Global Agg 500M
0.08%0.42%0.19%-0.73%-5.96%-3.91%5.63%2.75%4.95%-1.16%
CSH2.L
Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP
1.74%4.67%5.61%4.72%1.54%0.13%0.30%0.82%0.70%0.23%

Correlation

The correlation between GAGG.L and CSH2.L is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

0.01

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

0.04

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

0.02

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2017

0.00

GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GAGG.L
CSH2.L

Real Estate

18.0%
0.0%

Healthcare

16.6%
11.3%

Financial Services

13.6%
10.4%

Industrials

10.9%
6.3%

Consumer Cyclical

10.8%
13.9%

Utilities

10.4%
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

9.4%
4.9%

Communication Services

8.4%
13.9%

Technology

2.0%
35.9%

Basic Materials

-

1.0%

Energy

-

1.4%

Real Estate

GAGG.L
18.0%
CSH2.L
0.0%

Healthcare

GAGG.L
16.6%
CSH2.L
11.3%

Financial Services

GAGG.L
13.6%
CSH2.L
10.4%

Industrials

GAGG.L
10.9%
CSH2.L
6.3%

Consumer Cyclical

GAGG.L
10.8%
CSH2.L
13.9%

Utilities

GAGG.L
10.4%
CSH2.L
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

GAGG.L
9.4%
CSH2.L
4.9%

Communication Services

GAGG.L
8.4%
CSH2.L
13.9%

Technology

GAGG.L
2.0%
CSH2.L
35.9%

Basic Materials

GAGG.L

-

CSH2.L
1.0%

Energy

GAGG.L

-

CSH2.L
1.4%

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

GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GAGG.L
GAGG.L Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
GAGG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GAGG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
GAGG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
GAGG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
GAGG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

CSH2.L
CSH2.L Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
CSH2.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSH2.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSH2.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
CSH2.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSH2.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
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.

GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Index Barclays Global Agg 500M (GAGG.L) and Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP (CSH2.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.


GAGG.LCSH2.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-7.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-14.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

4.37

-3.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.84

27.66

-26.82

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.75

159.04

-157.28

GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GAGG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.66, which is lower than the CSH2.L Sharpe Ratio of 8.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GAGG.L and CSH2.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


GAGG.LCSH2.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.66

8.05

-7.39

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.12

6.49

-6.61

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

4.68

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.03

4.62

-4.59

Drawdowns

GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GAGG.L drawdown since its inception was -19.47%, which is greater than CSH2.L's maximum drawdown of -0.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GAGG.L and CSH2.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GAGG.LCSH2.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.47%

-0.37%

-19.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.73%

-0.16%

-3.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.94%

-0.29%

-4.65%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.17%

-0.29%

-13.88%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-0.37%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-14.03%

0.00%

-14.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.68%

-0.00%

-9.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.78%

0.03%

+1.75%

Volatility

GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi Index Barclays Global Agg 500M (GAGG.L) has a higher volatility of 1.19% compared to Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP (CSH2.L) at 0.08%. This indicates that GAGG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSH2.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GAGG.LCSH2.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.19%

0.08%

+1.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.47%

0.25%

+3.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.70%

0.54%

+4.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.55%

0.56%

+5.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.17%

0.44%

+6.73%

GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GAGG.L has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than CSH2.L's 0.07% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

GAGG.L vs. CSH2.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither GAGG.L nor CSH2.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


GAGG.L and CSH2.L have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, GAGG.L is cheaper at 0.03% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

GAGG.L is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.07% for CSH2.L.

GAGG.L is categorized as Global Bonds, while CSH2.L is Money Market. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for GAGG.L and 0.07% for CSH2.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GAGG.L and CSH2.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