USML.L vs. RTYS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

USML.L (Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A) and RTYS.L (Invesco Russell 2000 UCITS ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds from Invesco tracking the Russell 2000 TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, USML.L returned 5.94%/yr vs 6.19%/yr for RTYS.L. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. USML.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for RTYS.L.

Performance

USML.L vs. RTYS.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 Invesco Russell 2000 UCITS ETF (RTYS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, USML.L achieves a 15.40% return, which is significantly lower than RTYS.L's 17.84% return.

USML.L

• 1D: 1.05%
• 1M: 1.79%
• YTD: 15.40%
• 6M: 15.62%
• 1Y: 33.26%
• 3Y*: 15.56%
• 5Y*: 5.94%
• 10Y*: —

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%

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
USML.L Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A	15.40%	6.56%	7.78%	17.52%	-15.95%	26.49%	11.11%	5.73%
RTYS.L Invesco Russell 2000 UCITS ETF	17.84%	12.51%	10.09%	18.90%	-21.01%	13.97%	19.89%	7.09%

Correlation

The correlation between USML.L and RTYS.L is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2019	0.96

The correlation between USML.L and RTYS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors	USML.L	RTYS.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%

Return for Risk

USML.L vs. RTYS.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: 64
USML.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
USML.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
USML.L Omega Ratio Rank: 56
USML.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
USML.L Martin Ratio Rank: 66

RTYS.L

RTYS.L Risk / Return Rank: 69
RTYS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
RTYS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
RTYS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 62
RTYS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
RTYS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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. RTYS.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 Invesco Russell 2000 UCITS ETF (RTYS.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.L	RTYS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.95	2.20	-0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.93	3.12	-0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.37	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.82	3.87	-0.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.96	12.65	-0.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current USML.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.95, which is comparable to the RTYS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of USML.L and RTYS.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

	USML.L	RTYS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.95	2.20	-0.24
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28	0.28	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.48	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.40	0.55	-0.15

Drawdowns

USML.L vs. RTYS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum USML.L drawdown since its inception was -42.69%, roughly equal to the maximum RTYS.L drawdown of -42.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USML.L and RTYS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	USML.L	RTYS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.69%	-42.15%	-0.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.67%	-10.57%	+1.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.02%	-28.71%	-0.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.02%	-31.97%	+2.95%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-42.15%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.13%	+0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.90%	-9.14%	-0.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.77%	3.24%	-0.47%

Volatility

USML.L vs. RTYS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 UCITS ETF A (USML.L) is 4.88%, while Invesco Russell 2000 UCITS ETF (RTYS.L) has a volatility of 6.29%. This indicates that USML.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RTYS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	USML.L	RTYS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.88%	6.29%	-1.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.53%	13.47%	-1.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.94%	18.64%	-1.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.17%	22.28%	-1.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.82%	22.16%	+1.66%

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

USML.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than RTYS.L's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

USML.L vs. RTYS.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both USML.L and RTYS.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, USML.L and RTYS.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, USML.L or RTYS.L?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, USML.L or RTYS.L?

USML.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for RTYS.L.

What is the main difference between USML.L and RTYS.L?

Both ETFs track Russell 2000 TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for USML.L and 0.25% for RTYS.L.