PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IH2O.L (iShares Global Water UCITS ETF) and CSP1.L (iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IH2O.L is a Water Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Water TR, while CSP1.L is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IH2O.L returned 10.41%/yr vs 16.07%/yr for CSP1.L. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IH2O.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for CSP1.L.

Performance

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Global Water UCITS ETF (IH2O.L) and iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IH2O.L achieves a -1.56% return, which is significantly lower than CSP1.L's 10.55% return. Over the past 10 years, IH2O.L has underperformed CSP1.L with an annualized return of 10.41%, while CSP1.L has yielded a comparatively higher 16.07% annualized return.

IH2O.L

1D
-0.06%
1M
-2.43%
YTD
-1.56%
6M
-2.69%
1Y
4.75%
3Y*
6.36%
5Y*
5.71%
10Y*
10.41%

CSP1.L

1D
0.05%
1M
5.54%
YTD
10.55%
6M
10.48%
1Y
29.13%
3Y*
19.02%
5Y*
14.94%
10Y*
16.07%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IH2O.L
iShares Global Water UCITS ETF		-1.56%10.23%6.31%7.67%-11.13%33.06%11.63%29.99%-4.91%16.22%
CSP1.L
iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF		10.55%9.37%27.35%19.79%-9.05%31.07%13.65%26.42%0.01%10.83%

Correlation

The correlation between IH2O.L and CSP1.L is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.35

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

0.48

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

0.62

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

0.72

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2010

0.66

Over the past year, the correlation between IH2O.L and CSP1.L has dropped to 0.35 - well below their long-term average of 0.66, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IH2O.L
CSP1.L

Utilities

46.1%
2.2%

Industrials

44.2%
7.9%

Basic Materials

5.8%
1.7%

Energy

1.9%
3.4%

Technology

1.2%
38.0%

Consumer Cyclical

0.5%
9.9%

Real Estate

0.2%
1.9%

Communication Services

-

10.7%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.7%

Financial Services

-

11.3%

Healthcare

-

8.4%

Utilities

IH2O.L
46.1%
CSP1.L
2.2%

Industrials

IH2O.L
44.2%
CSP1.L
7.9%

Basic Materials

IH2O.L
5.8%
CSP1.L
1.7%

Energy

IH2O.L
1.9%
CSP1.L
3.4%

Technology

IH2O.L
1.2%
CSP1.L
38.0%

Consumer Cyclical

IH2O.L
0.5%
CSP1.L
9.9%

Real Estate

IH2O.L
0.2%
CSP1.L
1.9%

Communication Services

IH2O.L

-

CSP1.L
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

IH2O.L

-

CSP1.L
4.7%

Financial Services

IH2O.L

-

CSP1.L
11.3%

Healthcare

IH2O.L

-

CSP1.L
8.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Global Water UCITS ETF

iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF

Often compared with IH2O.L:
IH2O.L vs. GLGG.LIH2O.L vs. FIWIH2O.L vs. PHOIH2O.L vs. IVVIH2O.L vs. IWQU.LIH2O.L vs. SLVR.DEIH2O.L vs. CIBR
Often compared with CSP1.L:
CSP1.L vs. CSPX.LCSP1.L vs. VUAG.LCSP1.L vs. SPYCSP1.L vs. IUSA.LCSP1.L vs. VUAA.LCSP1.L vs. SPY5.LCSP1.L vs. VOO

Return for Risk

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IH2O.L
IH2O.L Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
IH2O.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IH2O.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
IH2O.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
IH2O.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
IH2O.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank
CSP1.L
CSP1.L Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
CSP1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSP1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSP1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
CSP1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSP1.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.

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Water UCITS ETF (IH2O.L) and iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.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.

IH2O.LCSP1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.39
2.73

-2.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.59
3.66

-3.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.51

-0.44

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.46

4.07

-3.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.23

14.99

-13.76

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

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IH2O.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.39, which is lower than the CSP1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IH2O.L and CSP1.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

IH2O.LCSP1.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.39

2.73

-2.34

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

1.04

-0.64

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.70

1.03

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.61

1.09

-0.48

Drawdowns

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IH2O.L drawdown since its inception was -35.40%, which is greater than CSP1.L's maximum drawdown of -25.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IH2O.L and CSP1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IH2O.LCSP1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.40%

-25.48%

-9.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.29%

-7.12%

-3.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.96%

-20.77%

+6.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.14%

-20.77%

-2.37%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.16%

-25.48%

-1.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.03%

-0.24%

-8.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.79%

-3.32%

-2.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.86%

1.94%

+1.92%

Volatility

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Water UCITS ETF (IH2O.L) has a higher volatility of 3.95% compared to iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSP1.L) at 2.62%. This indicates that IH2O.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSP1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IH2O.LCSP1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.95%

2.62%

+1.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.15%

7.16%

+2.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.26%

10.62%

+1.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.97%

14.31%

-0.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.92%

15.57%

-0.65%

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IH2O.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CSP1.L's 0.07% expense ratio.

Dividends

IH2O.L vs. CSP1.L - Dividend Comparison

IH2O.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.91%, while CSP1.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CSP1.L
iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IH2O.L
iShares Global Water UCITS ETF		1.91%1.78%1.34%1.51%1.32%2.25%1.29%1.84%2.30%1.98%2.17%2.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

IH2O.L and CSP1.L have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CSP1.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CSP1.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for IH2O.L.

IH2O.L is categorized as Water Equities, while CSP1.L is S&P 500. IH2O.L tracks S&P Global Water TR, while CSP1.L tracks S&P 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for IH2O.L and 0.07% for CSP1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IH2O.L and CSP1.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