3145.HK vs. 2846.HK

Last updated Jul 22, 2026

3145.HK (ChinaAMC Asia High Dividend ETF) and 2846.HK (iShares Core CSI 300 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - 3145.HK is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the Bloomberg APAC High Dividend 40 Net Return Index, while 2846.HK is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI 300 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, 3145.HK returned 10.34%/yr vs 7.23%/yr for 2846.HK. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. 3145.HK charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for 2846.HK.

Performance

3145.HK vs. 2846.HK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a HK$10,000 investment in ChinaAMC Asia High Dividend ETF (3145.HK) and iShares Core CSI 300 ETF (2846.HK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3145.HK achieves a 12.74% return, which is significantly higher than 2846.HK's 6.74% return. Over the past 10 years, 3145.HK has outperformed 2846.HK with an annualized return of 10.34%, while 2846.HK has yielded a comparatively lower 7.23% annualized return.

3145.HK

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 3.18%
• 6M: 6.54%
• YTD: 12.74%
• 1Y: 20.20%
• 3Y*: 18.94%
• 5Y*: 10.02%
• 10Y*: 10.34%
• ALL TIME*: 8.39%

2846.HK

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: -4.29%
• 6M: 4.34%
• YTD: 6.74%
• 1Y: 24.47%
• 3Y*: 11.76%
• 5Y*: -0.33%
• 10Y*: 7.23%
• ALL TIME*: 3.39%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
2846.HK iShares Core CSI 300 ETF	HK$5.85M	HK$5.36M	HK$4.89M
3145.HK ChinaAMC Asia High Dividend ETF	HK$14.01M	HK$20.09M	HK$17.30M

3145.HK vs. 2846.HK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
3145.HK ChinaAMC Asia High Dividend ETF	12.74%	22.59%	17.17%	11.62%	-11.17%	6.94%	3.52%	19.78%	-8.87%	39.80%
2846.HK iShares Core CSI 300 ETF	6.74%	25.69%	14.25%	-11.18%	-27.18%	-1.25%	38.90%	33.16%	-27.08%	38.62%

Correlation

The correlation between 3145.HK and 2846.HK is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.44
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2014	0.44

Return for Risk

3145.HK vs. 2846.HK — Risk / Return Rank

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

3145.HK

3145.HK Risk / Return Rank: 50
3145.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
3145.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
3145.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 53
3145.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
3145.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 44

2846.HK

2846.HK Risk / Return Rank: 52
2846.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
2846.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
2846.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 42
2846.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
2846.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

3145.HK vs. 2846.HK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ChinaAMC Asia High Dividend ETF (3145.HK) and iShares Core CSI 300 ETF (2846.HK). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	3145.HK	2846.HK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	1.21	+0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.97	1.70	+0.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.21	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.84	2.38	-0.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.31	8.87	-3.55

3145.HK vs. 2846.HK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 3145.HK Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the 2846.HK Sharpe Ratio of 1.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 3145.HK and 2846.HK, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

3145.HK vs. 2846.HK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 3145.HK drawdown since its inception was -34.05%, smaller than the maximum 2846.HK drawdown of -51.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3145.HK and 2846.HK.

Drawdown Indicators

	3145.HK	2846.HK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.05%	-51.06%	+17.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.45%	-10.05%	-1.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.46%	-30.47%	+12.01%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.22%	-42.55%	+14.33%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.05%	-48.87%	+14.82%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.21%	-14.59%	+10.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.03%	-28.18%	+20.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.92%	2.66%	+1.26%

Volatility

3145.HK vs. 2846.HK - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ChinaAMC Asia High Dividend ETF (3145.HK) is 4.79%, while iShares Core CSI 300 ETF (2846.HK) has a volatility of 9.27%. This indicates that 3145.HK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than 2846.HK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	3145.HK	2846.HK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.79%	9.27%	-4.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.72%	15.20%	-3.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.59%	19.70%	-5.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.42%	23.60%	-8.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.53%	22.88%	-7.35%

3145.HK vs. 2846.HK - Expense Ratio Comparison

3145.HK has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than 2846.HK's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

3145.HK vs. 2846.HK - Dividend Comparison

3145.HK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.79%, more than 2846.HK's 1.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
2846.HK iShares Core CSI 300 ETF	1.30%	1.39%	1.15%	1.60%	1.10%	0.84%	1.14%	1.33%	1.78%	0.93%	1.94%	1.73%
3145.HK ChinaAMC Asia High Dividend ETF	7.79%	3.82%	2.51%	2.87%	3.00%	2.68%	2.79%	2.22%	2.82%	2.00%	2.94%	0.71%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both 3145.HK and 2846.HK in my portfolio?

3145.HK and 2846.HK have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, 3145.HK or 2846.HK?

On fees, 2846.HK is cheaper at 0.38% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, 3145.HK or 2846.HK?

2846.HK is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for 3145.HK.

What is the main difference between 3145.HK and 2846.HK?

3145.HK is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while 2846.HK is China Equities. 3145.HK tracks Bloomberg APAC High Dividend 40 Net Return Index, while 2846.HK tracks CSI 300 Index. They also come from different issuers: ChinaAMC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for 3145.HK and 0.38% for 2846.HK.