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

Performance

R1GR.AS vs. MWOW.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (R1GR.AS) and Amundi Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF Accumulating (MWOW.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

R1GR.AS is traded in USD, while MWOW.DE is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the MWOW.DE 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 higher than MWOW.DE's 6.10% return.


R1GR.AS

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

MWOW.DE

1D
-0.22%
1M
5.18%
YTD
6.10%
6M
6.50%
1Y
25.09%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

R1GR.AS vs. MWOW.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
R1GR.AS
iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF
6.45%17.57%8.87%
MWOW.DE
Amundi Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF Accumulating
6.10%18.45%8.09%

Correlation

The correlation between R1GR.AS and MWOW.DE is 0.94, 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

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 8, 2024

0.94

The correlation between R1GR.AS and MWOW.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.94 - 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. MWOW.DE — 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

MWOW.DE
MWOW.DE Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
MWOW.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MWOW.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
MWOW.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
MWOW.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
MWOW.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
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. MWOW.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (R1GR.AS) and Amundi Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF Accumulating (MWOW.DE). 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.ASMWOW.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.27

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.59

1.68

-0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.20

5.55

-0.35

R1GR.AS vs. MWOW.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current R1GR.AS Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is comparable to the MWOW.DE Sharpe Ratio of 1.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of R1GR.AS and MWOW.DE, 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.ASMWOW.DEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.63

1.61

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.32

1.04

+0.29

Drawdowns

R1GR.AS vs. MWOW.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum R1GR.AS drawdown since its inception was -23.09%, roughly equal to the maximum MWOW.DE drawdown of -23.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for R1GR.AS and MWOW.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


R1GR.ASMWOW.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.09%

-23.46%

+0.37%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.71%

-14.91%

-0.80%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.53%

-1.64%

+0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.34%

-3.89%

+0.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.84%

4.51%

+0.33%

Volatility

R1GR.AS vs. MWOW.DE - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF (R1GR.AS) has a higher volatility of 4.13% compared to Amundi Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF Accumulating (MWOW.DE) at 3.76%. This indicates that R1GR.AS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MWOW.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


R1GR.ASMWOW.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.13%

3.76%

+0.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.33%

11.09%

+0.24%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.36%

15.56%

-0.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.90%

19.66%

-0.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.90%

19.66%

-0.76%

R1GR.AS vs. MWOW.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

R1GR.AS has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than MWOW.DE's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, 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. MWOW.DE - Dividend Comparison

Neither R1GR.AS nor MWOW.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, R1GR.AS and MWOW.DE 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, R1GR.AS is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

R1GR.AS is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for MWOW.DE.

R1GR.AS tracks Russell 1000 Growth UCITS 30/18 Capped index, while MWOW.DE tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for R1GR.AS and 0.19% for MWOW.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for R1GR.AS and MWOW.DE

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