PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LGUG.L vs. CU1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LGUG.L vs. CU1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G US Equity UCITS ETF (LGUG.L) and iShares MSCI USA UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CU1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with LGUG.L having a 10.49% return and CU1.L slightly lower at 10.45%.


LGUG.L

1D
-0.07%
1M
5.71%
YTD
10.49%
6M
10.18%
1Y
28.95%
3Y*
19.37%
5Y*
14.90%
10Y*

CU1.L

1D
-0.02%
1M
5.61%
YTD
10.45%
6M
10.25%
1Y
28.77%
3Y*
19.14%
5Y*
14.48%
10Y*
15.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LGUG.L vs. CU1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
LGUG.L
L&G US Equity UCITS ETF
10.49%9.75%27.44%21.53%-10.98%29.52%15.44%26.42%
CU1.L
iShares MSCI USA UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
10.45%9.22%27.38%20.66%-10.62%28.72%16.30%24.03%

Correlation

The correlation between LGUG.L and CU1.L is 0.98 - 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

0.98

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

0.98

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

0.97

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 8, 2019

0.83

The correlation between LGUG.L and CU1.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.83 (all time) to 0.98 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

LGUG.L vs. CU1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LGUG.L
CU1.L

Technology

38.3%
35.4%

Communication Services

11.2%
11.3%

Financial Services

11.1%
11.6%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
10.2%

Healthcare

8.6%
8.6%

Industrials

7.6%
8.5%

Consumer Defensive

4.7%
4.8%

Energy

3.3%
3.6%

Utilities

2.0%
2.3%

Real Estate

1.6%
1.9%

Basic Materials

1.6%
1.8%

Technology

LGUG.L
38.3%
CU1.L
35.4%

Communication Services

LGUG.L
11.2%
CU1.L
11.3%

Financial Services

LGUG.L
11.1%
CU1.L
11.6%

Consumer Cyclical

LGUG.L
10.1%
CU1.L
10.2%

Healthcare

LGUG.L
8.6%
CU1.L
8.6%

Industrials

LGUG.L
7.6%
CU1.L
8.5%

Consumer Defensive

LGUG.L
4.7%
CU1.L
4.8%

Energy

LGUG.L
3.3%
CU1.L
3.6%

Utilities

LGUG.L
2.0%
CU1.L
2.3%

Real Estate

LGUG.L
1.6%
CU1.L
1.9%

Basic Materials

LGUG.L
1.6%
CU1.L
1.8%

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

LGUG.L vs. CU1.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LGUG.L
LGUG.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
LGUG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LGUG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
LGUG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
LGUG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
LGUG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

CU1.L
CU1.L Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
CU1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CU1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
CU1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
CU1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
CU1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
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.

LGUG.L vs. CU1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G US Equity UCITS ETF (LGUG.L) and iShares MSCI USA UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CU1.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.


LGUG.LCU1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.50

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.60

3.73

-0.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.19

12.95

-0.76

LGUG.L vs. CU1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LGUG.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.66, which is comparable to the CU1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGUG.L and CU1.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


LGUG.LCU1.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.66

2.70

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.03

0.99

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.20

1.11

+0.09

Drawdowns

LGUG.L vs. CU1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGUG.L drawdown since its inception was -24.75%, roughly equal to the maximum CU1.L drawdown of -25.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGUG.L and CU1.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LGUG.LCU1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.75%

-25.87%

+1.12%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.01%

-7.68%

-0.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.49%

-21.55%

+0.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.49%

-21.55%

+0.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.87%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.30%

-0.21%

-0.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.78%

-3.43%

-0.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.37%

2.22%

+0.15%

Volatility

LGUG.L vs. CU1.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G US Equity UCITS ETF (LGUG.L) has a higher volatility of 2.89% compared to iShares MSCI USA UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CU1.L) at 2.64%. This indicates that LGUG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CU1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LGUG.LCU1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.89%

2.64%

+0.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.56%

7.16%

+0.40%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.83%

10.59%

+0.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.84%

14.55%

+0.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.37%

15.76%

+1.61%

LGUG.L vs. CU1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LGUG.L has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than CU1.L's 0.33% expense ratio.


Dividends

LGUG.L vs. CU1.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither LGUG.L nor CU1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.98, LGUG.L and CU1.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, LGUG.L is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LGUG.L is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CU1.L.

Both ETFs track Russell 1000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for LGUG.L and 0.33% for CU1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LGUG.L and CU1.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