PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
3199.HK vs. 1816.HK
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

3199.HK vs. 1816.HK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a HK$10,000 investment in ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK) and CGN Power (1816.HK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3199.HK achieves a 5.99% return, which is significantly lower than 1816.HK's 11.55% return. Over the past 10 years, 3199.HK has underperformed 1816.HK with an annualized return of 2.92%, while 1816.HK has yielded a comparatively higher 7.60% annualized return.


3199.HK

1D
-0.17%
1M
1.09%
YTD
5.99%
6M
6.91%
1Y
7.82%
3Y*
5.62%
5Y*
2.88%
10Y*
2.92%

1816.HK

1D
0.63%
1M
-5.81%
YTD
11.55%
6M
6.12%
1Y
26.19%
3Y*
21.77%
5Y*
17.70%
10Y*
7.60%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

3199.HK vs. 1816.HK - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
3199.HK
ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF
5.99%5.50%3.24%2.30%-6.26%7.36%10.59%0.61%0.60%6.18%
1816.HK
CGN Power
11.55%7.04%44.53%15.25%-17.57%49.92%-15.94%16.35%-8.90%2.08%

Correlation

The correlation between 3199.HK and 1816.HK is 0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

0.03

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

0.04

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

0.10

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

0.11

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2014

0.09

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

3199.HK vs. 1816.HK — Risk / Return Rank

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

3199.HK
3199.HK Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
3199.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
3199.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
3199.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
3199.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
3199.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank

1816.HK
1816.HK Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
1816.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
1816.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
1816.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
1816.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
1816.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

3199.HK vs. 1816.HK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK) and CGN Power (1816.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.


3199.HK1816.HKDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.91

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.19

+0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.39

1.61

+3.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.10

4.12

+8.98

3199.HK vs. 1816.HK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 3199.HK Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is higher than the 1816.HK Sharpe Ratio of 1.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 3199.HK and 1816.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


3199.HK1816.HKDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.71

1.04

+0.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.57

0.60

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

0.29

+0.30

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

0.12

+0.45

Drawdowns

3199.HK vs. 1816.HK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 3199.HK drawdown since its inception was -11.05%, smaller than the maximum 1816.HK drawdown of -68.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3199.HK and 1816.HK.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


3199.HK1816.HKDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.05%

-68.29%

+57.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.60%

-16.74%

+15.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.84%

-35.46%

+31.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-11.05%

-35.46%

+24.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-11.05%

-35.46%

+24.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.41%

-12.61%

+12.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.26%

-46.89%

+43.63%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.63%

6.46%

-5.83%

Volatility

3199.HK vs. 1816.HK - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK) is 1.54%, while CGN Power (1816.HK) has a volatility of 7.03%. This indicates that 3199.HK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than 1816.HK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


3199.HK1816.HKDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.54%

7.03%

-5.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.83%

19.43%

-15.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.06%

25.97%

-20.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.74%

30.17%

-24.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.71%

26.77%

-21.06%

Dividends

3199.HK vs. 1816.HK - Dividend Comparison

3199.HK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.31%, more than 1816.HK's 3.11% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
1816.HK
CGN Power
3.11%3.52%3.62%4.74%5.31%4.08%4.97%4.05%4.48%2.73%2.34%0.11%
3199.HK
ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF
3.31%3.34%3.43%3.51%3.65%3.40%3.29%3.57%3.62%3.39%3.56%3.69%

Frequently Asked Questions


3199.HK and 1816.HK have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for 3199.HK and 1816.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