PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PUST.PA vs. CSH.PA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PUST.PA vs. CSH.PA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Amundi PEA Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF Acc (PUST.PA) and Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc (CSH.PA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PUST.PA achieves a 20.88% return, which is significantly higher than CSH.PA's 0.78% return. Over the past 10 years, PUST.PA has outperformed CSH.PA with an annualized return of 21.21%, while CSH.PA has yielded a comparatively lower 0.92% annualized return.


PUST.PA

1D
-0.83%
1M
9.29%
YTD
20.88%
6M
19.27%
1Y
37.45%
3Y*
24.32%
5Y*
18.55%
10Y*
21.21%

CSH.PA

1D
0.01%
1M
0.18%
YTD
0.78%
6M
0.98%
1Y
1.99%
3Y*
2.96%
5Y*
1.89%
10Y*
0.92%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PUST.PA vs. CSH.PA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
PUST.PA
Amundi PEA Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF Acc
20.88%5.71%35.33%50.06%-29.76%38.74%36.04%40.41%4.65%16.05%
CSH.PA
Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc
0.78%2.25%3.69%3.22%-0.06%-0.65%1.93%-0.61%-0.55%-0.45%

Correlation

The correlation between PUST.PA and CSH.PA is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.08

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

-0.04

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

-0.01

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

0.00

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 6, 2014

-0.01

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

PUST.PA vs. CSH.PA — Risk / Return Rank

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

PUST.PA
PUST.PA Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
PUST.PA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PUST.PA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
PUST.PA Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
PUST.PA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
PUST.PA Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

CSH.PA
CSH.PA Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
CSH.PA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSH.PA Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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.

PUST.PA vs. CSH.PA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi PEA Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF Acc (PUST.PA) and Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc (CSH.PA). 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.


PUST.PACSH.PADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.59

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.96

-0.55

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.66

11.24

-7.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.77

57.34

-46.57

PUST.PA vs. CSH.PA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PUST.PA Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is lower than the CSH.PA Sharpe Ratio of 3.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PUST.PA and CSH.PA, 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


PUST.PACSH.PADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.37

3.96

-1.59

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

5.28

-4.36

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.06

1.41

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.04

0.79

+0.26

Drawdowns

PUST.PA vs. CSH.PA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PUST.PA drawdown since its inception was -31.40%, which is greater than CSH.PA's maximum drawdown of -3.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PUST.PA and CSH.PA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PUST.PACSH.PADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.40%

-3.73%

-27.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.09%

-0.18%

-9.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.80%

-0.18%

-26.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.40%

-0.77%

-30.63%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.40%

-2.27%

-29.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.83%

0.00%

-0.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.88%

-1.04%

-4.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.45%

0.03%

+3.42%

Volatility

PUST.PA vs. CSH.PA - Volatility Comparison

Amundi PEA Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF Acc (PUST.PA) has a higher volatility of 4.31% compared to Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc (CSH.PA) at 0.09%. This indicates that PUST.PA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSH.PA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PUST.PACSH.PADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.31%

0.09%

+4.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.86%

0.41%

+10.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.59%

0.50%

+15.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.81%

0.35%

+19.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.74%

0.64%

+19.10%

PUST.PA vs. CSH.PA - Expense Ratio Comparison

PUST.PA has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than CSH.PA's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

PUST.PA vs. CSH.PA - Dividend Comparison

Neither PUST.PA nor CSH.PA has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CSH.PA
Amundi EUR Overnight Return UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.05%0.05%2.60%
PUST.PA
Amundi PEA Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


PUST.PA and CSH.PA have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CSH.PA is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CSH.PA is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for PUST.PA.

PUST.PA is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while CSH.PA is Money Market. PUST.PA tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while CSH.PA tracks Solactive Euro Overnight Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for PUST.PA and 0.10% for CSH.PA.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PUST.PA and CSH.PA

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