ASHR vs. CNYA
ASHR (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF) and CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) are both China Equities funds - ASHR tracks the CSI 300 Index while CNYA tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ASHR returned 6.32%/yr vs 6.81%/yr for CNYA. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ASHR charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CNYA.
Performance
ASHR vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASHR achieves a 13.55% return, which is significantly higher than CNYA's 12.12% return. Over the past 10 years, ASHR has underperformed CNYA with an annualized return of 6.32%, while CNYA has yielded a comparatively higher 6.81% annualized return.
ASHR
- 1D
- 2.64%
- 1M
- 5.52%
- YTD
- 13.55%
- 6M
- 14.38%
- 1Y
- 42.93%
- 3Y*
- 14.04%
- 5Y*
- 0.31%
- 10Y*
- 6.32%
CNYA
- 1D
- 2.38%
- 1M
- 4.73%
- YTD
- 12.12%
- 6M
- 13.24%
- 1Y
- 41.13%
- 3Y*
- 13.23%
- 5Y*
- 0.25%
- 10Y*
- 6.81%
ASHR vs. CNYA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 13.55% | 27.02% | 11.95% | -12.52% | -27.52% | -1.57% | 36.29% | 36.50% | -28.45% | 33.47% |
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 12.12% | 26.48% | 10.78% | -13.76% | -26.51% | 3.53% | 41.54% | 35.95% | -26.56% | 30.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASHR and CNYA is 0.97 - 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 | 0.97 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2016 | 0.94 |
The correlation between ASHR and CNYA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.
ASHR vs. CNYA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ASHR
CNYA
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
Energy
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
ASHR
CNYA
Financial Services
ASHR
CNYA
Industrials
ASHR
CNYA
Basic Materials
ASHR
CNYA
Consumer Defensive
ASHR
CNYA
Consumer Cyclical
ASHR
CNYA
Healthcare
ASHR
CNYA
Utilities
ASHR
CNYA
Energy
ASHR
CNYA
Communication Services
ASHR
CNYA
Real Estate
ASHR
CNYA
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
ASHR vs. CNYA — Risk / Return Rank
ASHR
CNYA
ASHR vs. CNYA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). 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.
| ASHR | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.41 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.61 | 5.44 | +0.16 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.31 | 14.99 | +1.32 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ASHR vs. CNYA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASHR drawdown since its inception was -51.30%, roughly equal to the maximum CNYA drawdown of -49.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHR and CNYA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASHR | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.30% | -49.49% | -1.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.69% | -7.59% | -0.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.12% | -33.35% | +0.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.59% | -44.65% | +0.06% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -51.30% | -49.49% | -1.81% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.00% | -11.18% | -1.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.13% | -20.65% | -8.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.64% | 2.75% | -0.11% |
Volatility
ASHR vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR) is 6.41%, while iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) has a volatility of 6.78%. This indicates that ASHR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNYA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASHR | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.41% | 6.78% | -0.37% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.47% | 13.22% | -0.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.58% | 18.11% | -0.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.96% | 23.88% | +0.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.09% | 23.51% | +0.58% |
ASHR vs. CNYA - Expense Ratio Comparison
ASHR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CNYA's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
ASHR vs. CNYA - Dividend Comparison
ASHR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.03%, more than CNYA's 1.68% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 2.03% | 2.31% | 1.13% | 2.48% | 1.13% | 0.88% | 0.81% | 0.98% | 1.32% | 0.84% | 0.73% | 30.13% |
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF | 1.68% | 1.92% | 2.51% | 4.23% | 2.69% | 1.11% | 1.06% | 1.21% | 3.92% | 0.97% | 1.38% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.97, ASHR and CNYA 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.
CNYA has higher volatility (6.78%) compared to ASHR (6.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHR dropped -51.30% vs CNYA's -49.49%.
On 10-year performance, CNYA leads with 6.81% vs 6.32% for ASHR. On fees, CNYA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, ASHR has been the lower-risk option at 6.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, CNYA has performed better with a 6.81% return vs 6.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CNYA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHR.
ASHR has the higher dividend yield at 2.03%, compared with 1.68% for CNYA.
ASHR tracks CSI 300 Index, while CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: DWS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHR and 0.60% for CNYA.
ASHR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.46 vs 2.29), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for ASHR and CNYA
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