PRAM.L vs. CSH2.L
PRAM.L (Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)) and CSH2.L (Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP) are both exchange-traded funds - PRAM.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, while CSH2.L is a Money Market fund actively managed by Amundi. PRAM.L is passively managed, while CSH2.L is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PRAM.L returned 23.23%/yr vs 7.71%/yr for CSH2.L. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PRAM.L charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for CSH2.L.
Performance
PRAM.L vs. CSH2.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
PRAM.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, PRAM.L achieves a 24.27% return, which is significantly higher than CSH2.L's 1.49% return.
PRAM.L
- 1D
- -1.56%
- 1M
- 4.75%
- YTD
- 24.27%
- 6M
- 27.23%
- 1Y
- 49.84%
- 3Y*
- 23.23%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
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%
PRAM.L vs. CSH2.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PRAM.L Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) | 24.27% | 32.60% | 7.14% | 9.82% | -16.79% | 0.00% |
CSH2.L Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP | 1.49% | 12.57% | 3.85% | 10.24% | -9.32% | 2.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between PRAM.L and CSH2.L is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2021 | 0.26 |
The correlation between PRAM.L and CSH2.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (all time) to 0.37 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
PRAM.L vs. CSH2.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Energy
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Financial Services
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Consumer Cyclical
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Industrials
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Communication Services
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Basic Materials
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Energy
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Healthcare
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Consumer Defensive
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Utilities
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
Real Estate
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
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
PRAM.L vs. CSH2.L — Risk / Return Rank
PRAM.L
CSH2.L
PRAM.L vs. CSH2.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.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.
| PRAM.L | CSH2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 1.09 | +0.37 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.96 | 0.82 | +3.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.36 | 1.79 | +12.57 |
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
| PRAM.L | CSH2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.57 | 0.51 | +2.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.30 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.14 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.75 | 0.07 | +0.68 |
Drawdowns
PRAM.L vs. CSH2.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PRAM.L drawdown since its inception was -28.74%, roughly equal to the maximum CSH2.L drawdown of -29.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PRAM.L and CSH2.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PRAM.L | CSH2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.74% | -29.83% | +1.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.53% | -4.11% | -8.42% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.73% | -7.81% | -8.92% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.98% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -25.51% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.13% | -1.62% | -1.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.60% | -12.73% | +4.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.46% | 1.88% | +1.58% |
Volatility
PRAM.L vs. CSH2.L - Volatility Comparison
Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L) has a higher volatility of 8.38% compared to Lyxor Smart Overnight Return UCITS ETF C-GBP (CSH2.L) at 1.81%. This indicates that PRAM.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
| PRAM.L | CSH2.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.38% | 1.81% | +6.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.56% | 4.94% | +11.62% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.30% | 6.62% | +12.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.39% | 8.55% | +12.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.39% | 9.36% | +12.03% |
PRAM.L vs. CSH2.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
PRAM.L has a 0.10% 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
PRAM.L vs. CSH2.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither PRAM.L nor CSH2.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
PRAM.L and CSH2.L have a correlation of 0.37, 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 0.10% for PRAM.L.
PRAM.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while CSH2.L is Money Market. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for PRAM.L and 0.07% for CSH2.L.
Find the right allocation for PRAM.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