36BZ.DE vs. CNAA.DE
36BZ.DE (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) and CNAA.DE (Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc) are both China Equities funds - 36BZ.DE tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion while CNAA.DE tracks the MSCI China A. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, 36BZ.DE returned -0.23%/yr vs -0.21%/yr for CNAA.DE. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. 36BZ.DE charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CNAA.DE.
Performance
36BZ.DE vs. CNAA.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with 36BZ.DE having a 9.71% return and CNAA.DE slightly higher at 9.91%.
36BZ.DE
- 1D
- -0.75%
- 1M
- 0.35%
- YTD
- 9.71%
- 6M
- 11.84%
- 1Y
- 33.04%
- 3Y*
- 8.44%
- 5Y*
- -0.23%
- 10Y*
- 5.98%
CNAA.DE
- 1D
- -0.79%
- 1M
- 0.35%
- YTD
- 9.91%
- 6M
- 11.19%
- 1Y
- 33.60%
- 3Y*
- 8.43%
- 5Y*
- -0.21%
- 10Y*
- —
36BZ.DE vs. CNAA.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
36BZ.DE iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | 9.71% | 10.25% | 19.91% | -17.13% | -21.26% | 13.41% | 28.50% | 12.40% |
CNAA.DE Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc | 9.91% | 10.09% | 19.81% | -17.19% | -20.96% | 13.50% | 28.18% | 12.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between 36BZ.DE and CNAA.DE is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2019 | 0.97 |
The correlation between 36BZ.DE and CNAA.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
36BZ.DE vs. CNAA.DE — Risk / Return Rank
36BZ.DE
CNAA.DE
36BZ.DE vs. CNAA.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (36BZ.DE) and Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc (CNAA.DE). 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.
| 36BZ.DE | CNAA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.37 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.10 | 5.08 | +0.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.77 | 13.52 | +0.25 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| 36BZ.DE | CNAA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.11 | 2.04 | +0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.01 | -0.01 | 0.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.27 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.03 | 0.29 | -0.26 |
Drawdowns
36BZ.DE vs. CNAA.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum 36BZ.DE drawdown since its inception was -53.30%, which is greater than CNAA.DE's maximum drawdown of -43.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 36BZ.DE and CNAA.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| 36BZ.DE | CNAA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.30% | -43.90% | -9.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.57% | -6.65% | +0.08% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.01% | -27.84% | -0.17% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -41.94% | -41.85% | -0.09% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -43.38% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.22% | -11.33% | +1.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -30.19% | -19.23% | -10.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.44% | 2.50% | -0.06% |
Volatility
36BZ.DE vs. CNAA.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (36BZ.DE) is 5.55%, while Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc (CNAA.DE) has a volatility of 6.13%. This indicates that 36BZ.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNAA.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| 36BZ.DE | CNAA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.55% | 6.13% | -0.58% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.96% | 11.38% | -0.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.83% | 16.52% | -0.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.44% | 21.44% | 0.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.10% | 22.51% | -0.41% |
36BZ.DE vs. CNAA.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
36BZ.DE has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than CNAA.DE's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
36BZ.DE vs. CNAA.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither 36BZ.DE nor CNAA.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.95, 36BZ.DE and CNAA.DE 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, CNAA.DE is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNAA.DE is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for 36BZ.DE.
36BZ.DE tracks MSCI China A Inclusion, while CNAA.DE tracks MSCI China A. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for 36BZ.DE and 0.35% for CNAA.DE.
Find the right allocation for 36BZ.DE and CNAA.DE
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