PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
3145.HK vs. 3070.HK
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

3145.HK vs. 3070.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 Ping An of China CSI HK Dividend ETF (3070.HK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3145.HK achieves a 12.74% return, which is significantly higher than 3070.HK's 7.62% return. Over the past 10 years, 3145.HK has underperformed 3070.HK with an annualized return of 10.34%, while 3070.HK has yielded a comparatively higher 11.90% 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%

3070.HK

1D
-0.94%
1M
2.92%
6M
6.44%
YTD
7.62%
1Y
11.70%
3Y*
23.47%
5Y*
16.01%
10Y*
11.90%
ALL TIME*
10.10%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
HK$14.01MHK$20.09MHK$17.30M

3145.HK vs. 3070.HK - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
3070.HK
Ping An of China CSI HK Dividend ETF
7.62%25.91%36.16%12.21%3.61%4.52%-12.13%9.46%-5.99%54.37%

Correlation

The correlation between 3145.HK and 3070.HK is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.47

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

0.52

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

0.58

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2014

0.56

The correlation between 3145.HK and 3070.HK shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (1 year) to 0.58 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

3145.HK vs. 3070.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: 5050
Overall Rank
3145.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3145.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
3145.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
3145.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
3145.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank

3070.HK
3070.HK Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
3070.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3070.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
3070.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
3070.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
3070.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
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.

3145.HK vs. 3070.HK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ChinaAMC Asia High Dividend ETF (3145.HK) and Ping An of China CSI HK Dividend ETF (3070.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.HK3070.HKDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.82

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.14

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.84

0.78

+1.05

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.31

2.43

+2.89

3145.HK vs. 3070.HK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 3145.HK Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is higher than the 3070.HK Sharpe Ratio of 0.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 3145.HK and 3070.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

3145.HK vs. 3070.HK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 3145.HK drawdown since its inception was -34.05%, roughly equal to the maximum 3070.HK drawdown of -33.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3145.HK and 3070.HK.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


3145.HK3070.HKDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.05%

-33.58%

-0.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.45%

-15.30%

+3.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.46%

-15.30%

-3.16%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.22%

-23.26%

-4.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.05%

-33.58%

-0.47%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.21%

-7.47%

+3.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.03%

-9.80%

+1.77%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.92%

4.89%

-0.97%

Volatility

3145.HK vs. 3070.HK - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ChinaAMC Asia High Dividend ETF (3145.HK) is 4.79%, while Ping An of China CSI HK Dividend ETF (3070.HK) has a volatility of 6.34%. This indicates that 3145.HK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than 3070.HK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


3145.HK3070.HKDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.79%

6.34%

-1.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.72%

11.74%

-0.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.59%

15.58%

-0.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.42%

19.13%

-3.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.53%

19.04%

-3.51%

3145.HK vs. 3070.HK - Expense Ratio Comparison

3145.HK has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than 3070.HK's 0.77% expense ratio.


Dividends

3145.HK vs. 3070.HK - Dividend Comparison

3145.HK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.79%, more than 3070.HK's 3.83% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
3070.HK
Ping An of China CSI HK Dividend ETF
3.83%4.79%3.93%6.93%8.04%6.05%4.20%4.33%4.86%2.45%6.13%3.33%
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


3145.HK and 3070.HK have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, 3145.HK is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

3145.HK is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for 3070.HK.

3145.HK is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while 3070.HK is China Equities. 3145.HK tracks Bloomberg APAC High Dividend 40 Net Return Index, while 3070.HK tracks CSI Hong Kong Dividend Index. They also come from different issuers: ChinaAMC and Ping An of China Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for 3145.HK and 0.77% for 3070.HK.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 3145.HK and 3070.HK

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