PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
R1GR.AS vs. CSPX.AS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

R1GR.AS vs. CSPX.AS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (R1GR.AS) and iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSPX.AS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

R1GR.AS is traded in USD, while CSPX.AS is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the CSPX.AS values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, R1GR.AS achieves a 6.45% return, which is significantly lower than CSPX.AS's 10.25% return.


R1GR.AS

1D
-0.17%
1M
5.23%
YTD
6.45%
6M
6.63%
1Y
25.33%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CSPX.AS

1D
0.03%
1M
4.52%
YTD
10.25%
6M
11.15%
1Y
27.84%
3Y*
22.11%
5Y*
13.71%
10Y*
15.22%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

R1GR.AS vs. CSPX.AS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
R1GR.AS
iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF
6.45%17.57%35.07%6.55%
CSPX.AS
iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF
10.25%17.97%25.59%4.59%

Correlation

The correlation between R1GR.AS and CSPX.AS is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2023

0.82

The correlation between R1GR.AS and CSPX.AS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

R1GR.AS vs. CSPX.AS — Risk / Return Rank

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

R1GR.AS
R1GR.AS Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
R1GR.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
R1GR.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
R1GR.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
R1GR.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
R1GR.AS Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank

CSPX.AS
CSPX.AS Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
CSPX.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSPX.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSPX.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
CSPX.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSPX.AS 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.

R1GR.AS vs. CSPX.AS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (R1GR.AS) and iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSPX.AS). 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.


R1GR.ASCSPX.ASDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.80

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.43

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.59

3.21

-1.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.20

13.65

-8.45

R1GR.AS vs. CSPX.AS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current R1GR.AS Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is lower than the CSPX.AS Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of R1GR.AS and CSPX.AS, 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


R1GR.ASCSPX.ASDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.63

2.43

-0.80

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.85

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.92

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.32

0.85

+0.48

Drawdowns

R1GR.AS vs. CSPX.AS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum R1GR.AS drawdown since its inception was -23.09%, smaller than the maximum CSPX.AS drawdown of -34.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for R1GR.AS and CSPX.AS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


R1GR.ASCSPX.ASDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.09%

-34.12%

+11.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.71%

-8.56%

-7.15%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.52%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.42%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.53%

-0.55%

-0.98%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.34%

-4.11%

+0.77%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.84%

2.03%

+2.81%

Volatility

R1GR.AS vs. CSPX.AS - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (R1GR.AS) has a higher volatility of 4.13% compared to iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF (CSPX.AS) at 2.79%. This indicates that R1GR.AS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSPX.AS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


R1GR.ASCSPX.ASDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.13%

2.79%

+1.34%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.33%

7.96%

+3.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.36%

11.30%

+4.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.90%

15.84%

+3.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.90%

16.30%

+2.60%

R1GR.AS vs. CSPX.AS - Expense Ratio Comparison

R1GR.AS has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than CSPX.AS'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

R1GR.AS vs. CSPX.AS - Dividend Comparison

Neither R1GR.AS nor CSPX.AS has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


R1GR.AS and CSPX.AS have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

CSPX.AS is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for R1GR.AS.

R1GR.AS is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CSPX.AS is S&P 500. R1GR.AS tracks Russell 1000 Growth UCITS 30/18 Capped index, while CSPX.AS tracks S&P 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for R1GR.AS and 0.07% for CSPX.AS.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for R1GR.AS and CSPX.AS

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