PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RTWP.L (L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF) and CUS1.L (iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds tracking the Russell 2000 TR USD, from Legal & General and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RTWP.L returned 12.09%/yr vs 11.88%/yr for CUS1.L. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RTWP.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.43%/yr for CUS1.L.

Performance

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.L) and iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUS1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with RTWP.L having a 15.30% return and CUS1.L slightly lower at 14.78%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with RTWP.L having a 12.09% annualized return and CUS1.L not far behind at 11.88%.

RTWP.L

1D
-0.54%
1M
4.26%
YTD
15.30%
6M
15.09%
1Y
34.36%
3Y*
14.42%
5Y*
8.12%
10Y*
12.09%

CUS1.L

1D
-0.12%
1M
5.16%
YTD
14.78%
6M
15.22%
1Y
34.49%
3Y*
13.45%
5Y*
7.60%
10Y*
11.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RTWP.L
L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF		15.30%3.61%11.18%13.44%-8.94%20.68%15.78%20.59%-7.77%4.46%
CUS1.L
iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc)		14.78%2.68%11.54%11.30%-7.26%19.95%14.64%22.34%-6.43%6.42%

Correlation

The correlation between RTWP.L and CUS1.L is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

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

0.96

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

0.96

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

0.97

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

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2010

0.90

The correlation between RTWP.L and CUS1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
RTWP.L
CUS1.L

Technology

20.0%
16.8%

Industrials

17.9%
19.6%

Financial Services

15.3%
15.1%

Healthcare

14.5%
12.6%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%
10.5%

Real Estate

5.9%
7.0%

Energy

5.3%
5.6%

Basic Materials

4.6%
3.9%

Utilities

2.8%
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

2.7%
3.9%

Communication Services

2.4%
2.5%

Technology

RTWP.L
20.0%
CUS1.L
16.8%

Industrials

RTWP.L
17.9%
CUS1.L
19.6%

Financial Services

RTWP.L
15.3%
CUS1.L
15.1%

Healthcare

RTWP.L
14.5%
CUS1.L
12.6%

Consumer Cyclical

RTWP.L
8.6%
CUS1.L
10.5%

Real Estate

RTWP.L
5.9%
CUS1.L
7.0%

Energy

RTWP.L
5.3%
CUS1.L
5.6%

Basic Materials

RTWP.L
4.6%
CUS1.L
3.9%

Utilities

RTWP.L
2.8%
CUS1.L
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

RTWP.L
2.7%
CUS1.L
3.9%

Communication Services

RTWP.L
2.4%
CUS1.L
2.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF

iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc)

Often compared with RTWP.L:
RTWP.L vs. IWMRTWP.L vs. ^GSPCRTWP.L vs. R2SC.LRTWP.L vs. FESMRTWP.L vs. SPY4.DERTWP.L vs. VWRL.ASRTWP.L vs. AVUV
Often compared with CUS1.L:
CUS1.L vs. WLDS.LCUS1.L vs. AVUVCUS1.L vs. R2SC.LCUS1.L vs. CSPX.LCUS1.L vs. AMZNCUS1.L vs. USSC.LCUS1.L vs. VIOG

Return for Risk

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
RTWP.L
RTWP.L Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
RTWP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTWP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank
CUS1.L
CUS1.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
CUS1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
CUS1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
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.

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.L) and iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUS1.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.

RTWP.LCUS1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.20
2.32

-0.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.02
3.16

-0.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.40

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.62

5.33

-0.71

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.92

16.44

-2.52

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTWP.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is comparable to the CUS1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTWP.L and CUS1.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

RTWP.LCUS1.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.20

2.32

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.42

0.40

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.59

0.61

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.69

0.70

-0.01

Drawdowns

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RTWP.L drawdown since its inception was -35.32%, roughly equal to the maximum CUS1.L drawdown of -35.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTWP.L and CUS1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RTWP.LCUS1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.32%

-35.26%

-0.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.40%

-6.44%

-0.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.77%

-28.89%

+0.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.77%

-28.89%

+0.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.32%

-35.26%

-0.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.79%

-0.40%

-0.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.05%

-6.38%

-0.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.46%

2.09%

+0.37%

Volatility

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L - Volatility Comparison

L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.L) has a higher volatility of 4.58% compared to iShares MSCI USA Small Cap ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF (Acc) (CUS1.L) at 3.95%. This indicates that RTWP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CUS1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RTWP.LCUS1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.58%

3.95%

+0.63%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.89%

9.93%

+0.96%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.63%

14.88%

+0.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.24%

18.85%

+0.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.40%

19.56%

+0.84%

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

RTWP.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CUS1.L's 0.43% expense ratio.

Dividends

RTWP.L vs. CUS1.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither RTWP.L nor CUS1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.96, RTWP.L and CUS1.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.

On fees, RTWP.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

RTWP.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for CUS1.L.

Both ETFs track Russell 2000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for RTWP.L and 0.43% for CUS1.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RTWP.L and CUS1.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