SPOL.L vs. CMU.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SPOL.L (iShares MSCI Poland UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and CMU.L (Amundi ETF MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select) are both Europe Equities funds - SPOL.L tracks the MSCI Poland NR EUR while CMU.L tracks the MSCI EMU NR EUR. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SPOL.L returned 10.37%/yr vs 10.86%/yr for CMU.L. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SPOL.L charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for CMU.L.

Performance

SPOL.L vs. CMU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Poland UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SPOL.L) and Amundi ETF MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select (CMU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with SPOL.L having a 14.98% return and CMU.L slightly higher at 15.52%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with SPOL.L having a 10.37% annualized return and CMU.L not far ahead at 10.86%.

SPOL.L

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 6.06%
• YTD: 14.98%
• 6M: 24.72%
• 1Y: 44.16%
• 3Y*: 30.21%
• 5Y*: 14.86%
• 10Y*: 10.37%

CMU.L

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: 7.55%
• YTD: 15.52%
• 6M: 17.22%
• 1Y: 29.93%
• 3Y*: 15.83%
• 5Y*: 10.45%
• 10Y*: 10.86%

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

SPOL.L vs. CMU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SPOL.L iShares MSCI Poland UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	14.98%	61.27%	-4.98%	41.52%	-17.96%	8.30%	-14.19%	-9.68%	-7.69%	40.45%
CMU.L Amundi ETF MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select	15.52%	25.71%	1.42%	14.39%	-5.30%	13.03%	4.59%	19.05%	-11.56%	17.21%

Correlation

The correlation between SPOL.L and CMU.L is 0.56, 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	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.60
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 20, 2011	0.55

The correlation between SPOL.L and CMU.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

SPOL.L vs. CMU.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SPOL.L	CMU.L
Financial Services	48.0%	21.8%
Energy	16.7%	0.0%
Consumer Cyclical	10.9%	10.1%
Basic Materials	9.8%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	5.4%	5.2%
Communication Services	3.2%	2.3%
Technology	2.2%	30.8%
Utilities	2.0%	5.8%
Industrials	1.9%	15.7%
Healthcare	-	4.2%
Real Estate	-	1.3%

Return for Risk

SPOL.L vs. CMU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPOL.L

SPOL.L Risk / Return Rank: 62
SPOL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
SPOL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
SPOL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 50
SPOL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
SPOL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 62

CMU.L

CMU.L Risk / Return Rank: 59
CMU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
CMU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
CMU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 61
CMU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
CMU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

SPOL.L vs. CMU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Poland UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SPOL.L) and Amundi ETF MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select (CMU.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.

	SPOL.L	CMU.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.90	2.01	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.61	2.82	-0.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.37	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.62	2.61	+2.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.04	9.79	+1.25
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SPOL.L vs. CMU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPOL.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the CMU.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPOL.L and CMU.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

	SPOL.L	CMU.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.90	2.01	-0.10
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.55	0.65	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.41	0.65	-0.24
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.16	0.48	-0.32

Drawdowns

SPOL.L vs. CMU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPOL.L drawdown since its inception was -56.64%, which is greater than CMU.L's maximum drawdown of -32.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPOL.L and CMU.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	SPOL.L	CMU.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.64%	-32.53%	-24.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.51%	-11.43%	+1.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.47%	-11.95%	-7.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.27%	-21.11%	-25.16%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-56.64%	-31.41%	-25.23%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.16%	-0.50%	-0.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.80%	-5.80%	-16.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.99%	3.05%	+0.94%

Volatility

SPOL.L vs. CMU.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Poland UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (SPOL.L) has a higher volatility of 7.20% compared to Amundi ETF MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select (CMU.L) at 5.38%. This indicates that SPOL.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SPOL.L	CMU.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.20%	5.38%	+1.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.30%	12.44%	+4.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.18%	14.87%	+8.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.10%	16.00%	+11.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.42%	16.78%	+8.64%

SPOL.L vs. CMU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

SPOL.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than CMU.L's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

SPOL.L vs. CMU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither SPOL.L nor CMU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SPOL.L and CMU.L in my portfolio?

SPOL.L and CMU.L have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, SPOL.L or CMU.L?

On fees, CMU.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, SPOL.L or CMU.L?

CMU.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for SPOL.L.

What is the main difference between SPOL.L and CMU.L?

SPOL.L tracks MSCI Poland NR EUR, while CMU.L tracks MSCI EMU NR EUR. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for SPOL.L and 0.15% for CMU.L.