NESP.L vs. RUSG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NESP.L (Invesco Nasdaq-100 ESG UCITS ETF Acc) and RUSG.L (Lyxor Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NESP.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth TR USD, while RUSG.L is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth Net Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NESP.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for RUSG.L.

Performance

NESP.L vs. RUSG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco Nasdaq-100 ESG UCITS ETF Acc (NESP.L) and Lyxor Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (RUSG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

NESP.L is traded in GBp, while RUSG.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the RUSG.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

NESP.L

• 1D: -0.61%
• 1M: 10.79%
• YTD: 20.57%
• 6M: 19.40%
• 1Y: 44.13%
• 3Y*: 25.65%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RUSG.L

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NESP.L vs. RUSG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
NESP.L Invesco Nasdaq-100 ESG UCITS ETF Acc	20.57%	12.78%	28.66%	48.13%	-25.12%	8.81%
RUSG.L Lyxor Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	23.38%	36.12%	-22.36%	7.00%

Correlation

The correlation between NESP.L and RUSG.L is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2021	0.64

The correlation between NESP.L and RUSG.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (3 years) to 0.64 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

NESP.L vs. RUSG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

NESP.L

NESP.L Risk / Return Rank: 77
NESP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
NESP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
NESP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 83
NESP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
NESP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

NESP.L vs. RUSG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Nasdaq-100 ESG UCITS ETF Acc (NESP.L) and Lyxor Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (RUSG.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.

	NESP.L	RUSG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.86	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.70	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.67	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.38	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NESP.L	RUSG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.86	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.60	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	NESP.L	RUSG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.62%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.96%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.10%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.61%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.26%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.24%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	NESP.L	RUSG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.41%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.95%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.35%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.41%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.41%	—	—

NESP.L vs. RUSG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

NESP.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than RUSG.L's 0.19% 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

NESP.L vs. RUSG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither NESP.L nor RUSG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NESP.L and RUSG.L in my portfolio?

NESP.L and RUSG.L have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, NESP.L or RUSG.L?

On fees, RUSG.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, NESP.L or RUSG.L?

RUSG.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for NESP.L.

What is the main difference between NESP.L and RUSG.L?

NESP.L is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while RUSG.L is Large Cap Growth Equities. NESP.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth TR USD, while RUSG.L tracks Russell 1000 Growth Net Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for NESP.L and 0.19% for RUSG.L.