IAAA.L vs. CSH2.L
IAAA.L (iShares Global AAA-AA Government Bond UCITS) and CSH2.L (Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP) are both exchange-traded funds - IAAA.L is a Global Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Aggregate TR USD, while CSH2.L is a Money Market fund actively managed by Amundi. IAAA.L is passively managed, while CSH2.L is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, IAAA.L returned -0.36%/yr vs 1.33%/yr for CSH2.L. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IAAA.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for CSH2.L.
Performance
IAAA.L vs. CSH2.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
IAAA.L is traded in USD, while CSH2.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CSH2.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IAAA.L achieves a 0.13% return, which is significantly lower than CSH2.L's 1.49% return. Over the past 10 years, IAAA.L has underperformed CSH2.L with an annualized return of -0.36%, while CSH2.L has yielded a comparatively higher 1.33% annualized return.
IAAA.L
- 1D
- 0.19%
- 1M
- 0.02%
- YTD
- 0.13%
- 6M
- 1.27%
- 1Y
- 2.00%
- 3Y*
- 3.96%
- 5Y*
- -3.01%
- 10Y*
- -0.36%
CSH2.L
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- -0.49%
- YTD
- 1.49%
- 6M
- 2.83%
- 1Y
- 3.38%
- 3Y*
- 7.71%
- 5Y*
- 2.57%
- 10Y*
- 1.33%
IAAA.L vs. CSH2.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IAAA.L iShares Global AAA-AA Government Bond UCITS | 0.13% | 10.70% | -5.21% | 8.69% | -21.12% | -8.15% | 12.09% | 4.75% | -2.34% | 9.35% |
CSH2.L Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP | 1.49% | 12.57% | 3.85% | 10.24% | -9.32% | -0.78% | 3.37% | 4.86% | -5.00% | 9.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between IAAA.L and CSH2.L is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 11, 2015 | 0.30 |
The correlation between IAAA.L and CSH2.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.30 (all time) to 0.40 (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
IAAA.L vs. CSH2.L — Risk / Return Rank
IAAA.L
CSH2.L
IAAA.L vs. CSH2.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global AAA-AA Government Bond UCITS (IAAA.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.
| IAAA.L | CSH2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.09 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.77 | 0.82 | -0.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.90 | 1.79 | +0.11 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IAAA.L | CSH2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 | 0.51 | -0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.42 | 0.30 | -0.72 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.06 | 0.14 | -0.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.07 | 0.07 | -0.14 |
Drawdowns
IAAA.L vs. CSH2.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IAAA.L drawdown since its inception was -32.79%, which is greater than CSH2.L's maximum drawdown of -29.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IAAA.L and CSH2.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IAAA.L | CSH2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.79% | -29.83% | -2.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.11% | -4.11% | 0.00% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -10.21% | -7.81% | -2.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.57% | -23.98% | -6.59% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.79% | -25.51% | -7.28% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.30% | -1.62% | -15.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.59% | -12.73% | +2.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.98% | 1.88% | +0.10% |
Volatility
IAAA.L vs. CSH2.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Global AAA-AA Government Bond UCITS (IAAA.L) has a higher volatility of 2.59% compared to Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP (CSH2.L) at 1.81%. This indicates that IAAA.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
| IAAA.L | CSH2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.59% | 1.81% | +0.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.78% | 4.94% | +0.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.83% | 6.62% | +2.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.26% | 8.55% | +2.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.36% | 9.36% | 0.00% |
IAAA.L vs. CSH2.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IAAA.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than CSH2.L's 0.07% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
IAAA.L vs. CSH2.L - Dividend Comparison
IAAA.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.69%, while CSH2.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSH2.L Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IAAA.L iShares Global AAA-AA Government Bond UCITS | 2.69% | 2.46% | 2.37% | 1.52% | 0.76% | 0.49% | 0.56% | 0.88% | 0.94% | 0.77% | 0.89% | 1.08% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IAAA.L and CSH2.L have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CSH2.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CSH2.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for IAAA.L.
IAAA.L is categorized as Global Bonds, while CSH2.L is Money Market. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for IAAA.L and 0.07% for CSH2.L.
Find the right allocation for IAAA.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