PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ASHS vs. DBJP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ASHS vs. DBJP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) and Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF (DBJP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ASHS achieves a 10.21% return, which is significantly lower than DBJP's 20.55% return. Over the past 10 years, ASHS has underperformed DBJP with an annualized return of 2.43%, while DBJP has yielded a comparatively higher 16.39% annualized return.


ASHS

1D
-2.86%
1M
-6.52%
6M
-0.37%
YTD
10.21%
1Y
42.00%
3Y*
12.63%
5Y*
2.59%
10Y*
2.43%

DBJP

1D
-1.79%
1M
-0.98%
6M
12.39%
YTD
20.55%
1Y
50.85%
3Y*
28.76%
5Y*
22.00%
10Y*
16.39%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ASHS vs. DBJP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ASHS
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF
10.21%39.48%2.68%-10.03%-24.78%17.66%28.22%24.53%-35.91%7.90%
DBJP
Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF
20.55%29.51%25.53%36.21%-4.19%13.04%10.53%20.87%-14.82%21.24%

Correlation

The correlation between ASHS and DBJP is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.37

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

0.21

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

0.23

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

0.28

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2014

0.28

The correlation between ASHS and DBJP shifts across timeframes, from 0.21 (3 years) to 0.37 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ASHS vs. DBJP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ASHS
DBJP

Technology

34.4%
21.7%

Industrials

18.4%
24.5%

Basic Materials

16.1%
3.4%

Healthcare

6.5%
5.6%

Financial Services

5.5%
17.0%

Consumer Cyclical

5.0%
11.9%

Utilities

2.1%
1.0%

Energy

2.0%
0.9%

Consumer Defensive

1.7%
3.3%

Communication Services

1.1%
8.9%

Real Estate

0.5%
1.9%

Technology

ASHS
34.4%
DBJP
21.7%

Industrials

ASHS
18.4%
DBJP
24.5%

Basic Materials

ASHS
16.1%
DBJP
3.4%

Healthcare

ASHS
6.5%
DBJP
5.6%

Financial Services

ASHS
5.5%
DBJP
17.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ASHS
5.0%
DBJP
11.9%

Utilities

ASHS
2.1%
DBJP
1.0%

Energy

ASHS
2.0%
DBJP
0.9%

Consumer Defensive

ASHS
1.7%
DBJP
3.3%

Communication Services

ASHS
1.1%
DBJP
8.9%

Real Estate

ASHS
0.5%
DBJP
1.9%

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. DBJP — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASHS
ASHS Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
ASHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASHS Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
ASHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASHS Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

DBJP
DBJP Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
DBJP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBJP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBJP Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
DBJP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBJP Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
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.

ASHS vs. DBJP - 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 Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF (DBJP). 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.


ASHSDBJPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.86

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.45

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.01

4.92

-1.91

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.87

18.08

-9.22

ASHS vs. DBJP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASHS Sharpe Ratio is 1.67, which is lower than the DBJP Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASHS and DBJP, 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...

Drawdowns

ASHS vs. DBJP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASHS drawdown since its inception was -69.90%, which is greater than DBJP's maximum drawdown of -31.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHS and DBJP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ASHSDBJPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-69.90%

-31.30%

-38.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.03%

-10.39%

-3.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-34.13%

-21.50%

-12.63%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-47.81%

-21.50%

-26.31%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.81%

-31.30%

-16.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-36.39%

-4.70%

-31.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-48.40%

-7.25%

-41.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.75%

2.82%

+1.93%

Volatility

ASHS vs. DBJP - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) has a higher volatility of 11.20% compared to Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF (DBJP) at 7.34%. This indicates that ASHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DBJP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ASHSDBJPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.20%

7.34%

+3.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.89%

15.83%

+4.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.32%

20.20%

+5.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.93%

19.21%

+7.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.76%

19.25%

+6.51%

ASHS vs. DBJP - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASHS has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than DBJP's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

ASHS vs. DBJP - Dividend Comparison

ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DBJP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.26%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
DBJP
Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF
1.26%2.81%2.80%5.21%0.80%2.30%2.53%2.56%3.87%2.07%1.13%5.95%

Frequently Asked Questions


ASHS and DBJP have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ASHS has higher volatility (11.20%) compared to DBJP (7.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHS dropped -69.90% vs DBJP's -31.30%.

On 10-year performance, DBJP leads with 16.39% vs 2.43% for ASHS. On fees, DBJP is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, DBJP has been the lower-risk option at 7.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, DBJP has performed better with a 16.39% return vs 2.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DBJP is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHS.

DBJP has the higher dividend yield at 1.26%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.

ASHS is categorized as China Equities, while DBJP is Japan Equities. ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index, while DBJP tracks MSCI Japan US Dollar Hedged Index. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHS and 0.45% for DBJP.

DBJP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 1.67), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ASHS and DBJP

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