ASHS vs. CNYA
ASHS (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF) and CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) are both China Equities funds - ASHS tracks the CSI 500 Index while CNYA tracks the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ASHS returned 4.33%/yr vs 6.81%/yr for CNYA. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ASHS charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CNYA.
Performance
ASHS vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASHS achieves a 23.25% return, which is significantly higher than CNYA's 12.12% return. Over the past 10 years, ASHS has underperformed CNYA with an annualized return of 4.33%, while CNYA has yielded a comparatively higher 6.81% annualized return.
ASHS
- 1D
- 2.15%
- 1M
- 4.69%
- YTD
- 23.25%
- 6M
- 27.23%
- 1Y
- 69.26%
- 3Y*
- 17.55%
- 5Y*
- 5.45%
- 10Y*
- 4.33%
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%
ASHS vs. CNYA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 23.25% | 39.48% | 2.68% | -10.03% | -24.78% | 17.66% | 28.22% | 24.53% | -35.91% | 7.90% |
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 ASHS and CNYA is 0.87, 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 | 0.87 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2016 | 0.83 |
The correlation between ASHS and CNYA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
ASHS vs. CNYA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ASHS
CNYA
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Utilities
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
ASHS
CNYA
Industrials
ASHS
CNYA
Basic Materials
ASHS
CNYA
Healthcare
ASHS
CNYA
Consumer Cyclical
ASHS
CNYA
Financial Services
ASHS
CNYA
Utilities
ASHS
CNYA
Energy
ASHS
CNYA
Consumer Defensive
ASHS
CNYA
Communication Services
ASHS
CNYA
Real Estate
ASHS
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
ASHS vs. CNYA — Risk / Return Rank
ASHS
CNYA
ASHS vs. CNYA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) 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.
| ASHS | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.72 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.61 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.41 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.96 | 5.44 | -0.48 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.51 | 14.99 | +0.52 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ASHS vs. CNYA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASHS drawdown since its inception was -69.90%, which is greater than CNYA's maximum drawdown of -49.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHS and CNYA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASHS | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -69.90% | -49.49% | -20.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.03% | -7.59% | -6.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.13% | -33.35% | -0.78% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -47.81% | -44.65% | -3.16% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -47.81% | -49.49% | +1.68% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -28.86% | -11.18% | -17.68% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -48.49% | -20.65% | -27.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.48% | 2.75% | +1.73% |
Volatility
ASHS vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) has a higher volatility of 7.65% compared to iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) at 6.78%. This indicates that ASHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNYA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASHS | CNYA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.65% | 6.78% | +0.87% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.69% | 13.22% | +4.47% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.19% | 18.11% | +5.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.57% | 23.88% | +2.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.60% | 23.51% | +2.09% |
ASHS vs. CNYA - Expense Ratio Comparison
ASHS has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CNYA's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
ASHS vs. CNYA - Dividend Comparison
ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CNYA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.69% | 0.65% | 1.90% | 0.76% | 0.43% | 0.57% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 8.34% |
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
ASHS and CNYA have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ASHS has higher volatility (7.65%) compared to CNYA (6.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHS dropped -69.90% vs CNYA's -49.49%.
On 10-year performance, CNYA leads with 6.81% vs 4.33% for ASHS. On fees, CNYA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, CNYA has been the lower-risk option at 6.78%. 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 4.33%. 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 ASHS.
CNYA has the higher dividend yield at 1.68%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.
ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index, while CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHS and 0.60% for CNYA.
ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 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 ASHS 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