PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
R1GR.L vs. R1GB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

R1GR.L vs. R1GB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (R1GR.L) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF USD Acc (R1GB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

R1GR.L is traded in USD, while R1GB.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the R1GB.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, R1GR.L achieves a 0.07% return, which is significantly lower than R1GB.L's 2.51% return.


R1GR.L

1D
-2.50%
1M
-3.30%
6M
1.11%
YTD
0.07%
1Y
9.87%
3Y*
19.37%
5Y*
10Y*

R1GB.L

1D
0.00%
1M
-0.12%
6M
3.65%
YTD
2.51%
1Y
12.54%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

R1GR.L vs. R1GB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
R1GR.L
iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
0.07%17.39%8.23%
R1GB.L
iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF USD Acc
2.51%17.73%-15.89%

Correlation

The correlation between R1GR.L and R1GB.L is 0.95, 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

0.95

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

0.95

The correlation between R1GR.L and R1GB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.95 - 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.L vs. R1GB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

R1GR.L
R1GR.L Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
R1GR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
R1GR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
R1GR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
R1GR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
R1GR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
Martin Ratio Rank

R1GB.L
R1GB.L Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
R1GB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
R1GB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
R1GB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
R1GB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
R1GB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
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.L vs. R1GB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (R1GR.L) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF USD Acc (R1GB.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


R1GR.LR1GB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.14

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.62

0.81

-0.19

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.90

2.50

-0.60

R1GR.L vs. R1GB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current R1GR.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.59, which is comparable to the R1GB.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of R1GR.L and R1GB.L, 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...

Drawdowns

R1GR.L vs. R1GB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum R1GR.L drawdown since its inception was -23.18%, smaller than the maximum R1GB.L drawdown of -33.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for R1GR.L and R1GB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


R1GR.LR1GB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.18%

-33.80%

+10.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.74%

-15.56%

-0.18%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.48%

-5.12%

-2.36%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.47%

-12.78%

+9.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.19%

5.03%

+0.16%

Volatility

R1GR.L vs. R1GB.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (R1GR.L) and iShares Russell 1000 Growth UCITS ETF USD Acc (R1GB.L) have volatilities of 6.07% and 6.21%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


R1GR.LR1GB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.07%

6.21%

-0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.00%

12.52%

+0.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.73%

16.48%

+0.25%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.08%

24.52%

-6.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.08%

24.52%

-6.44%

R1GR.L vs. R1GB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both R1GR.L and R1GB.L have an expense ratio of 0.18%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

R1GR.L vs. R1GB.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither R1GR.L nor R1GB.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, R1GR.L and R1GB.L 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.

Both ETFs have the same 0.18% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

R1GR.L and R1GB.L have the same expense ratio: 0.18% per year.

Both ETFs track Russell 1000 Growth UCITS 30/18 Capped Net Tax 15% Index.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for R1GR.L and R1GB.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