R2SC.L vs. USML.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

R2SC.L (SPDR Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF) and USML.L (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds tracking the Russell 2000 TR USD, from State Street and Invesco respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, R2SC.L returned 7.28%/yr vs 7.09%/yr for USML.L. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. R2SC.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for USML.L.

Performance

R2SC.L vs. USML.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (R2SC.L) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A (USML.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

R2SC.L is traded in GBP, while USML.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the USML.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, R2SC.L achieves a 18.02% return, which is significantly higher than USML.L's 15.86% return.

R2SC.L

• 1D: 1.16%
• 1M: 4.52%
• YTD: 18.02%
• 6M: 15.96%
• 1Y: 42.36%
• 3Y*: 15.55%
• 5Y*: 7.28%
• 10Y*: 11.46%

USML.L

• 1D: 1.05%
• 1M: 2.72%
• YTD: 15.86%
• 6M: 14.81%
• 1Y: 34.55%
• 3Y*: 12.66%
• 5Y*: 7.09%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

R2SC.L vs. USML.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
R2SC.L SPDR Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF	18.02%	4.66%	11.86%	12.18%	-11.55%	15.87%	15.73%	4.88%
USML.L Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A	15.86%	-1.03%	9.66%	11.65%	-5.95%	27.68%	7.85%	3.04%

Correlation

The correlation between R2SC.L and USML.L is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2019	0.93

The correlation between R2SC.L and USML.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

R2SC.L vs. USML.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	R2SC.L	USML.L
Industrials	17.7%	15.5%
Technology	17.1%	15.5%
Healthcare	16.5%	11.0%
Financial Services	15.7%	16.9%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	13.4%
Energy	6.1%	5.9%
Real Estate	6.1%	7.7%
Basic Materials	4.8%	5.1%
Utilities	2.9%	2.0%
Communication Services	2.5%	3.6%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	3.5%

Return for Risk

R2SC.L vs. USML.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

R2SC.L

R2SC.L Risk / Return Rank: 77
R2SC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
R2SC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
R2SC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 70
R2SC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
R2SC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 76

USML.L

USML.L Risk / Return Rank: 64
USML.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
USML.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
USML.L Omega Ratio Rank: 56
USML.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
USML.L Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

R2SC.L vs. USML.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (R2SC.L) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A (USML.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.

	R2SC.L	USML.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.46	2.08	+0.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.32	2.89	+0.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.37	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.88	4.87	+0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.39	15.54	-1.15
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

R2SC.L vs. USML.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current R2SC.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.46, which is comparable to the USML.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of R2SC.L and USML.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	R2SC.L	USML.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.46	2.08	+0.38
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.36	0.35	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.55	0.40	+0.15

Drawdowns

R2SC.L vs. USML.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum R2SC.L drawdown since its inception was -35.03%, roughly equal to the maximum USML.L drawdown of -35.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for R2SC.L and USML.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	R2SC.L	USML.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.03%	-35.94%	+0.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.63%	-7.07%	-1.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.00%	-30.43%	+0.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.00%	-30.43%	+0.43%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.03%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.06%	0.00%	-0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.51%	-8.22%	-0.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.94%	2.22%	+0.72%

Volatility

R2SC.L vs. USML.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (R2SC.L) has a higher volatility of 5.17% compared to Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A (USML.L) at 4.56%. This indicates that R2SC.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USML.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	R2SC.L	USML.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.17%	4.56%	+0.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.78%	11.56%	+0.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.18%	16.57%	+0.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.07%	20.19%	-0.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.78%	22.73%	-1.95%

R2SC.L vs. USML.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

R2SC.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than USML.L's 0.14% expense ratio.

Dividends

R2SC.L vs. USML.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither R2SC.L nor USML.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both R2SC.L and USML.L in my portfolio?

R2SC.L and USML.L have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, R2SC.L or USML.L?

On fees, USML.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, R2SC.L or USML.L?

USML.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for R2SC.L.

What is the main difference between R2SC.L and USML.L?

Both ETFs track Russell 2000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for R2SC.L and 0.14% for USML.L.