PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
USML.L vs. RS2G.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

USML.L vs. RS2G.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A (USML.L) and Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD (RS2G.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

USML.L is traded in USD, while RS2G.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the RS2G.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, USML.L achieves a 14.20% return, which is significantly lower than RS2G.L's 16.34% return.


USML.L

1D
-0.52%
1M
1.20%
YTD
14.20%
6M
14.90%
1Y
32.20%
3Y*
14.83%
5Y*
5.72%
10Y*

RS2G.L

1D
-1.03%
1M
3.84%
YTD
16.34%
6M
16.70%
1Y
39.43%
3Y*
18.18%
5Y*
5.87%
10Y*
10.70%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
USML.L
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A
14.20%6.56%7.78%17.52%-15.95%26.49%11.11%5.73%
RS2G.L
Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD
16.34%12.43%10.00%18.40%-20.84%14.26%19.38%7.69%

Correlation

The correlation between USML.L and RS2G.L is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.90

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

0.93

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

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2019

0.93

The correlation between USML.L and RS2G.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

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


Sectors
USML.L
RS2G.L

Financial Services

16.9%
15.8%

Industrials

15.5%
17.7%

Technology

15.5%
17.0%

Consumer Cyclical

13.4%
8.4%

Healthcare

11.0%
16.5%

Real Estate

7.7%
6.1%

Energy

5.9%
6.1%

Basic Materials

5.1%
4.8%

Communication Services

3.6%
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.5%
2.4%

Utilities

2.0%
2.9%

Financial Services

USML.L
16.9%
RS2G.L
15.8%

Industrials

USML.L
15.5%
RS2G.L
17.7%

Technology

USML.L
15.5%
RS2G.L
17.0%

Consumer Cyclical

USML.L
13.4%
RS2G.L
8.4%

Healthcare

USML.L
11.0%
RS2G.L
16.5%

Real Estate

USML.L
7.7%
RS2G.L
6.1%

Energy

USML.L
5.9%
RS2G.L
6.1%

Basic Materials

USML.L
5.1%
RS2G.L
4.8%

Communication Services

USML.L
3.6%
RS2G.L
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

USML.L
3.5%
RS2G.L
2.4%

Utilities

USML.L
2.0%
RS2G.L
2.9%

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

USML.L vs. RS2G.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

USML.L
USML.L Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
USML.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
USML.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
USML.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
USML.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
USML.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

RS2G.L
RS2G.L Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
RS2G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RS2G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
RS2G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
RS2G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
RS2G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

USML.L vs. RS2G.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A (USML.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.


USML.LRS2G.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.31

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.36

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.70

3.65

+0.05

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.58

11.94

-0.36

USML.L vs. RS2G.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current USML.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the RS2G.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of USML.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


USML.LRS2G.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.90

2.20

-0.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

0.27

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.40

0.55

-0.15

Drawdowns

USML.L vs. RS2G.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum USML.L drawdown since its inception was -42.69%, roughly equal to the maximum RS2G.L drawdown of -41.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USML.L and RS2G.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


USML.LRS2G.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.69%

-41.28%

-1.41%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.67%

-10.75%

+2.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.02%

-28.67%

-0.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.02%

-32.25%

+3.23%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.28%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.83%

-1.16%

+0.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.90%

-10.01%

+0.11%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.77%

3.29%

-0.52%

Volatility

USML.L vs. RS2G.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A (USML.L) is 4.79%, while Amundi Russell 2000 UCITS ETF USD (RS2G.L) has a volatility of 5.79%. This indicates that USML.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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


USML.LRS2G.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.79%

5.79%

-1.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.50%

12.77%

-1.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.96%

17.88%

-0.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.17%

21.73%

-0.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.82%

22.02%

+1.80%

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

USML.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than RS2G.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

USML.L vs. RS2G.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.90, USML.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.

On fees, USML.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

USML.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RS2G.L.

Both ETFs track Russell 2000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for USML.L and 0.35% for RS2G.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for USML.L and RS2G.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