PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
AH50.L vs. XCHA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

AH50.L (Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D) and XCHA.L (Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C) are both China Equities funds from Xtrackers - AH50.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while XCHA.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AH50.L returned 7.74%/yr vs 9.32%/yr for XCHA.L. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AH50.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for XCHA.L.

Performance

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L) and Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AH50.L achieves a 12.41% return, which is significantly higher than XCHA.L's 11.44% return. Over the past 10 years, AH50.L has underperformed XCHA.L with an annualized return of 7.74%, while XCHA.L has yielded a comparatively higher 9.32% annualized return.

AH50.L

1D
-0.30%
1M
1.76%
YTD
12.41%
6M
17.72%
1Y
34.29%
3Y*
16.08%
5Y*
0.20%
10Y*
7.74%

XCHA.L

1D
-0.57%
1M
2.27%
YTD
11.44%
6M
15.20%
1Y
41.84%
3Y*
15.51%
5Y*
2.07%
10Y*
9.32%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
AH50.L
Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D		12.41%26.76%17.77%-13.04%-21.01%-6.02%28.04%34.30%-21.35%34.04%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		11.44%30.08%16.02%-11.00%-24.25%3.24%45.85%40.57%-24.28%35.23%

Correlation

The correlation between AH50.L and XCHA.L is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

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

0.92

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

0.90

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

0.91

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

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2016

0.89

The correlation between AH50.L and XCHA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
AH50.L
XCHA.L

Technology

27.6%
26.9%

Industrials

20.4%
16.5%

Basic Materials

14.3%
10.3%

Financial Services

11.4%
20.0%

Consumer Cyclical

7.5%
6.5%

Healthcare

6.1%
4.7%

Consumer Defensive

5.3%
7.2%

Energy

2.6%
3.0%

Utilities

2.4%
2.8%

Communication Services

1.8%
1.6%

Real Estate

0.7%
0.5%

Technology

AH50.L
27.6%
XCHA.L
26.9%

Industrials

AH50.L
20.4%
XCHA.L
16.5%

Basic Materials

AH50.L
14.3%
XCHA.L
10.3%

Financial Services

AH50.L
11.4%
XCHA.L
20.0%

Consumer Cyclical

AH50.L
7.5%
XCHA.L
6.5%

Healthcare

AH50.L
6.1%
XCHA.L
4.7%

Consumer Defensive

AH50.L
5.3%
XCHA.L
7.2%

Energy

AH50.L
2.6%
XCHA.L
3.0%

Utilities

AH50.L
2.4%
XCHA.L
2.8%

Communication Services

AH50.L
1.8%
XCHA.L
1.6%

Real Estate

AH50.L
0.7%
XCHA.L
0.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D

Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C

Often compared with AH50.L:
AH50.L vs. CA3S.LAH50.L vs. CM5S.LAH50.L vs. HMCT.LAH50.L vs. CHIN.LAH50.L vs. XCX6.LAH50.L vs. JRCE.LAH50.L vs. IASH.L
Often compared with XCHA.L:
XCHA.L vs. ASHRXCHA.L vs. CSPX.LXCHA.L vs. VUAA.DEXCHA.L vs. HMCT.LXCHA.L vs. CA3S.LXCHA.L vs. XCNA.LXCHA.L vs. CEBG.L

Return for Risk

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
AH50.L
AH50.L Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
AH50.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AH50.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
AH50.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
AH50.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
AH50.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank
XCHA.L
XCHA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L) and Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.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.

AH50.LXCHA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.89
2.51

-0.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.58
3.44

-0.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.45

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.11

6.69

-2.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.57

19.41

-6.84

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AH50.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.89, which is comparable to the XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AH50.L and XCHA.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

AH50.LXCHA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.89

2.51

-0.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.01

0.09

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.33

0.41

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.33

0.29

+0.04

Drawdowns

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AH50.L drawdown since its inception was -50.58%, roughly equal to the maximum XCHA.L drawdown of -50.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AH50.L and XCHA.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

AH50.LXCHA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-50.58%

-50.88%

+0.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.30%

-6.23%

-2.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.95%

-26.84%

+0.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.27%

-40.18%

-5.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-50.58%

-44.90%

-5.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.78%

-1.93%

-6.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.40%

-24.58%

+3.18%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.72%

2.15%

+0.57%

Volatility

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L) has a higher volatility of 6.50% compared to Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L) at 6.13%. This indicates that AH50.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XCHA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

AH50.LXCHA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.50%

6.13%

+0.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.07%

11.46%

+1.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.04%

16.60%

+1.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.33%

22.39%

+1.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.38%

22.69%

+0.69%

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AH50.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XCHA.L's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

AH50.L vs. XCHA.L - Dividend Comparison

AH50.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.08%, while XCHA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
AH50.L
Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D		2.08%2.79%2.37%2.72%3.00%1.78%1.57%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.92, AH50.L and XCHA.L 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, XCHA.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XCHA.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for AH50.L.

AH50.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while XCHA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for AH50.L and 0.50% for XCHA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AH50.L and XCHA.L

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