RTWP.L vs. RS2G.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RTWP.L (L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF) and RS2G.L (Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds tracking the Russell 2000 TR USD, from Legal & General and Amundi respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RTWP.L returned 12.05%/yr vs 11.51%/yr for RS2G.L. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. RTWP.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RS2G.L.

Performance

RTWP.L vs. RS2G.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 Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD (RS2G.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RTWP.L achieves a 16.93% return, which is significantly lower than RS2G.L's 18.06% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with RTWP.L having a 12.05% annualized return and RS2G.L not far behind at 11.51%.

RTWP.L

• 1D: 1.41%
• 1M: 4.16%
• YTD: 16.93%
• 6M: 15.64%
• 1Y: 36.63%
• 3Y*: 14.81%
• 5Y*: 8.43%
• 10Y*: 12.05%

RS2G.L

• 1D: 1.24%
• 1M: 4.44%
• YTD: 18.06%
• 6M: 15.88%
• 1Y: 42.31%
• 3Y*: 15.57%
• 5Y*: 7.25%
• 10Y*: 11.51%

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

RTWP.L vs. RS2G.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RTWP.L L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF	16.93%	3.61%	11.18%	13.44%	-8.94%	20.68%	15.78%	20.59%	-7.77%	4.46%
RS2G.L Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD	18.06%	4.55%	11.87%	12.47%	-11.37%	15.31%	15.83%	21.59%	-7.91%	4.60%

Correlation

The correlation between RTWP.L and RS2G.L is 0.98 - 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	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.98
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.98
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2016	0.98

The correlation between RTWP.L and RS2G.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

RTWP.L vs. RS2G.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RTWP.L	RS2G.L
Technology	20.0%	17.0%
Industrials	17.9%	17.7%
Financial Services	15.3%	15.8%
Healthcare	14.5%	16.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.6%	8.4%
Real Estate	5.9%	6.1%
Energy	5.3%	6.1%
Basic Materials	4.6%	4.8%
Utilities	2.8%	2.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.7%	2.4%
Communication Services	2.4%	2.4%

Return for Risk

RTWP.L vs. RS2G.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: 75
RTWP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
RTWP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
RTWP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 66
RTWP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
RTWP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 78

RS2G.L

RS2G.L Risk / Return Rank: 77
RS2G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RS2G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
RS2G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 70
RS2G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
RS2G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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. RS2G.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 Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD (RS2G.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.L	RS2G.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	2.50	-0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.18	3.37	-0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.41	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.93	4.84	+0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.84	14.20	+0.64
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. RS2G.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTWP.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is comparable to the RS2G.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTWP.L and RS2G.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

	RTWP.L	RS2G.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.34	2.50	-0.16
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	0.36	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.59	0.55	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	0.60	+0.09

Drawdowns

RTWP.L vs. RS2G.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RTWP.L drawdown since its inception was -35.32%, roughly equal to the maximum RS2G.L drawdown of -35.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTWP.L and RS2G.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	RTWP.L	RS2G.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.32%	-35.05%	-0.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.40%	-8.69%	+1.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.77%	-30.04%	+1.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.77%	-30.04%	+1.27%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.32%	-35.05%	-0.27%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.05%	-8.55%	+1.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.46%	2.97%	-0.51%

Volatility

RTWP.L vs. RS2G.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for L&G Russell 2000 US Small Cap UCITS ETF (RTWP.L) is 4.55%, while Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD (RS2G.L) has a volatility of 5.30%. This indicates that RTWP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RS2G.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RTWP.L	RS2G.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.55%	5.30%	-0.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.96%	11.90%	-0.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.61%	16.87%	-1.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.25%	20.07%	-0.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.40%	20.93%	-0.53%

RTWP.L vs. RS2G.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

RTWP.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than RS2G.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

RTWP.L vs. RS2G.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither RTWP.L nor RS2G.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RTWP.L and RS2G.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, RTWP.L and RS2G.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.

Which ETF is better, RTWP.L or RS2G.L?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, RTWP.L or RS2G.L?

RTWP.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RS2G.L.

What is the main difference between RTWP.L and RS2G.L?

Both ETFs track Russell 2000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for RTWP.L and 0.35% for RS2G.L.