PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Russell 2000 UCITS ETF (RTYS.L) and Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

RTYS.L is traded in USD, while EQGB.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the EQGB.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with RTYS.L having a 17.84% return and EQGB.L slightly higher at 18.57%.


RTYS.L

1D
1.12%
1M
3.43%
YTD
17.84%
6M
16.55%
1Y
41.15%
3Y*
18.71%
5Y*
6.19%
10Y*
10.66%

EQGB.L

1D
-0.66%
1M
7.50%
YTD
18.57%
6M
19.28%
1Y
37.80%
3Y*
30.52%
5Y*
15.13%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RTYS.L
Invesco Russell 2000 UCITS ETF
17.84%12.51%10.09%18.90%-21.01%13.97%19.89%24.61%-12.53%3.70%
EQGB.L
Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc
18.57%28.61%24.02%62.04%-42.01%26.53%49.89%40.34%-8.11%7.88%

Correlation

The correlation between RTYS.L and EQGB.L is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.67

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

0.64

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

0.70

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 19, 2017

0.67

The correlation between RTYS.L and EQGB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RTYS.L
EQGB.L

Industrials

17.7%
3.1%

Technology

17.0%
53.6%

Healthcare

16.5%
4.2%

Financial Services

15.8%
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

8.4%
12.2%

Real Estate

6.1%
0.1%

Energy

6.1%
0.6%

Basic Materials

4.8%
1.1%

Utilities

2.9%
1.4%

Communication Services

2.4%
15.8%

Consumer Defensive

2.4%
7.7%

Industrials

RTYS.L
17.7%
EQGB.L
3.1%

Technology

RTYS.L
17.0%
EQGB.L
53.6%

Healthcare

RTYS.L
16.5%
EQGB.L
4.2%

Financial Services

RTYS.L
15.8%
EQGB.L
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

RTYS.L
8.4%
EQGB.L
12.2%

Real Estate

RTYS.L
6.1%
EQGB.L
0.1%

Energy

RTYS.L
6.1%
EQGB.L
0.6%

Basic Materials

RTYS.L
4.8%
EQGB.L
1.1%

Utilities

RTYS.L
2.9%
EQGB.L
1.4%

Communication Services

RTYS.L
2.4%
EQGB.L
15.8%

Consumer Defensive

RTYS.L
2.4%
EQGB.L
7.7%

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

RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

RTYS.L
RTYS.L Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
RTYS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTYS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTYS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
RTYS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTYS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

EQGB.L
EQGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
EQGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
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.

RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Russell 2000 UCITS ETF (RTYS.L) and Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.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.


RTYS.LEQGB.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.34

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.87

2.52

+1.36

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.65

9.34

+3.30

RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTYS.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is comparable to the EQGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTYS.L and EQGB.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


RTYS.LEQGB.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.20

2.05

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

0.61

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.55

0.79

-0.24

Drawdowns

RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RTYS.L drawdown since its inception was -42.15%, smaller than the maximum EQGB.L drawdown of -47.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTYS.L and EQGB.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RTYS.LEQGB.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.15%

-47.56%

+5.41%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.57%

-14.96%

+4.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.71%

-22.21%

-6.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.97%

-47.56%

+15.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.13%

-1.12%

+0.99%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.14%

-9.54%

+0.40%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.24%

4.03%

-0.79%

Volatility

RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Russell 2000 UCITS ETF (RTYS.L) has a higher volatility of 6.29% compared to Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc (EQGB.L) at 5.53%. This indicates that RTYS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EQGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RTYS.LEQGB.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.29%

5.53%

+0.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.47%

13.97%

-0.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.64%

18.40%

+0.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.28%

24.75%

-2.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.16%

24.79%

-2.63%

RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

RTYS.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than EQGB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

RTYS.L vs. EQGB.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither RTYS.L nor EQGB.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
EQGB.L
Invesco EQQQ Nasdaq-100 UCITS ETF GBP Hdg Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.04%
RTYS.L
Invesco Russell 2000 UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RTYS.L and EQGB.L have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, RTYS.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

RTYS.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for EQGB.L.

RTYS.L is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while EQGB.L is Nasdaq-100. RTYS.L tracks Russell 2000 TR USD, while EQGB.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for RTYS.L and 0.35% for EQGB.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RTYS.L and EQGB.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