SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SAUS.L (iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF) and KRWL.L (Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - SAUS.L tracks the MSCI Australia NR USD while KRWL.L tracks the MSCI Korea NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SAUS.L returned 6.61%/yr vs 19.95%/yr for KRWL.L. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SAUS.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for KRWL.L.

Performance

SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF (SAUS.L) and Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc (KRWL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SAUS.L achieves a 10.24% return, which is significantly lower than KRWL.L's 106.66% return.

SAUS.L

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: 0.40%
• YTD: 10.24%
• 6M: 11.59%
• 1Y: 15.06%
• 3Y*: 9.70%
• 5Y*: 6.61%
• 10Y*: 9.11%

KRWL.L

• 1D: -4.89%
• 1M: 16.79%
• YTD: 106.66%
• 6M: 125.77%
• 1Y: 237.10%
• 3Y*: 45.48%
• 5Y*: 19.95%
• 10Y*: —

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

SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
SAUS.L iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF	10.24%	6.23%	3.26%	7.65%	5.74%	9.68%	5.72%	17.21%	-2.13%
KRWL.L Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc	106.66%	86.86%	-21.27%	13.04%	-19.64%	-7.54%	38.43%	7.15%	-12.12%

Correlation

The correlation between SAUS.L and KRWL.L is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.32
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.43
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2018	0.53

Over the past year, the correlation between SAUS.L and KRWL.L has dropped to 0.32 - well below their long-term average of 0.53, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SAUS.L	KRWL.L
Financial Services	42.0%	1.8%
Basic Materials	25.6%	0.4%
Consumer Cyclical	6.4%	10.8%
Real Estate	5.2%	2.0%
Healthcare	4.3%	12.8%
Energy	4.2%	1.2%
Industrials	4.2%	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	10.1%
Communication Services	1.9%	11.7%
Utilities	1.6%	2.1%
Technology	1.0%	42.8%

Return for Risk

SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

SAUS.L

SAUS.L Risk / Return Rank: 34
SAUS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
SAUS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
SAUS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 32
SAUS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
SAUS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 32

KRWL.L

KRWL.L Risk / Return Rank: 97
KRWL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
KRWL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
KRWL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 96
KRWL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
KRWL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF (SAUS.L) and Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc (KRWL.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.

	SAUS.L	KRWL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.18	6.22	-5.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.80	5.50	-3.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.80	-0.60
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.76	10.93	-9.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.76	38.59	-33.84
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SAUS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is lower than the KRWL.L Sharpe Ratio of 6.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SAUS.L and KRWL.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

	SAUS.L	KRWL.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.18	6.22	-5.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42	0.78	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.39	0.61	-0.22

Drawdowns

SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SAUS.L drawdown since its inception was -38.14%, smaller than the maximum KRWL.L drawdown of -44.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SAUS.L and KRWL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	SAUS.L	KRWL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.14%	-44.10%	+5.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.49%	-21.55%	+13.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.11%	-28.42%	+7.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.11%	-40.54%	+19.43%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.14%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.58%	-5.36%	+1.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.77%	-19.40%	+11.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.16%	6.11%	-2.95%

Volatility

SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Australia UCITS ETF (SAUS.L) is 4.46%, while Lyxor MSCI Korea UCITS ETF - Acc (KRWL.L) has a volatility of 17.51%. This indicates that SAUS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KRWL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SAUS.L	KRWL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.46%	17.51%	-13.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.14%	32.27%	-22.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.72%	37.87%	-25.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.80%	25.51%	-9.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.11%	25.79%	-6.68%

SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

SAUS.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than KRWL.L's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

SAUS.L vs. KRWL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither SAUS.L nor KRWL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SAUS.L and KRWL.L in my portfolio?

SAUS.L and KRWL.L have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, SAUS.L or KRWL.L?

On fees, KRWL.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, SAUS.L or KRWL.L?

KRWL.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for SAUS.L.

What is the main difference between SAUS.L and KRWL.L?

SAUS.L tracks MSCI Australia NR USD, while KRWL.L tracks MSCI Korea NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for SAUS.L and 0.45% for KRWL.L.