AEJL.L vs. C300.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

AEJL.L (Lyxor UCITS MSCI AC Asia-Pacific Ex Japan C-E) and C300.L (Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - AEJL.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Pac Ex JPN NR USD, while C300.L is a China Equities fund tracking the S&P China A 300 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, AEJL.L returned 16.92%/yr vs 13.61%/yr for C300.L. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AEJL.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for C300.L.

Performance

AEJL.L vs. C300.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Lyxor UCITS MSCI AC Asia-Pacific Ex Japan C-E (AEJL.L) and Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

AEJL.L is traded in GBp, while C300.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the C300.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AEJL.L achieves a 15.41% return, which is significantly higher than C300.L's 9.30% return.

AEJL.L

• 1D: -2.72%
• 1M: -9.91%
• 6M: 9.63%
• YTD: 15.41%
• 1Y: 27.43%
• 3Y*: 16.92%
• 5Y*: 6.34%
• 10Y*: 68.73%

C300.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -6.37%
• 6M: 5.62%
• YTD: 9.30%
• 1Y: 33.14%
• 3Y*: 13.61%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AEJL.L vs. C300.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
AEJL.L Lyxor UCITS MSCI AC Asia-Pacific Ex Japan C-E	15.41%	20.45%	11.91%	0.03%	-1.26%
C300.L Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc	9.30%	24.25%	16.79%	-16.21%	3.69%

Correlation

The correlation between AEJL.L and C300.L is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.55
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2022	0.56

The correlation between AEJL.L and C300.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AEJL.L vs. C300.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AEJL.L

AEJL.L Risk / Return Rank: 54
AEJL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
AEJL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
AEJL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 56
AEJL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
AEJL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 56

C300.L

C300.L Risk / Return Rank: 75
C300.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
C300.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
C300.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
C300.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
C300.L Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

AEJL.L vs. C300.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor UCITS MSCI AC Asia-Pacific Ex Japan C-E (AEJL.L) and Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.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.

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.

	AEJL.L	C300.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	1.68	-0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.93	2.32	-0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.30	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.16	3.76	-1.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.29	11.75	-4.46

AEJL.L vs. C300.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AEJL.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is comparable to the C300.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AEJL.L and C300.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.

Drawdowns

AEJL.L vs. C300.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AEJL.L drawdown since its inception was -55.23%, which is greater than C300.L's maximum drawdown of -34.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AEJL.L and C300.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	AEJL.L	C300.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.23%	-34.94%	-20.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.63%	-8.85%	-3.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.13%	-26.04%	+8.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.10%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.13%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.63%	-8.85%	-3.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.33%	-15.08%	+2.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.75%	2.83%	+0.92%

Volatility

AEJL.L vs. C300.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor UCITS MSCI AC Asia-Pacific Ex Japan C-E (AEJL.L) and Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.L) have volatilities of 8.93% and 9.13%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AEJL.L	C300.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.93%	9.13%	-0.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.23%	15.25%	+1.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.33%	19.84%	-0.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.59%	21.49%	-2.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2,741.82%	21.49%	+2,720.33%

AEJL.L vs. C300.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AEJL.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than C300.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

AEJL.L vs. C300.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AEJL.L nor C300.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AEJL.L and C300.L in my portfolio?

AEJL.L and C300.L have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AEJL.L or C300.L?

On fees, C300.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AEJL.L or C300.L?

C300.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for AEJL.L.

What is the main difference between AEJL.L and C300.L?

AEJL.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while C300.L is China Equities. AEJL.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Pac Ex JPN NR USD, while C300.L tracks S&P China A 300 Index. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for AEJL.L and 0.35% for C300.L.