ASHS vs. DBJP
ASHS (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF) and DBJP (Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ASHS is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI 500 Index, while DBJP is a Japan Equities fund tracking the MSCI Japan US Dollar Hedged Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ASHS returned 4.06%/yr vs 17.47%/yr for DBJP. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ASHS charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for DBJP.
Performance
ASHS vs. DBJP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with ASHS having a 20.07% return and DBJP slightly higher at 21.03%. Over the past 10 years, ASHS has underperformed DBJP with an annualized return of 4.06%, while DBJP has yielded a comparatively higher 17.47% annualized return.
ASHS
- 1D
- -2.58%
- 1M
- 1.98%
- YTD
- 20.07%
- 6M
- 23.64%
- 1Y
- 63.65%
- 3Y*
- 16.53%
- 5Y*
- 4.91%
- 10Y*
- 4.06%
DBJP
- 1D
- -4.33%
- 1M
- 3.46%
- YTD
- 21.03%
- 6M
- 21.10%
- 1Y
- 53.92%
- 3Y*
- 28.45%
- 5Y*
- 21.61%
- 10Y*
- 17.47%
ASHS vs. DBJP - 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 | 20.07% | 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 | 21.03% | 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 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.27 |
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 0.20 (3 years) to 0.32 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ASHS vs. DBJP - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ASHS
DBJP
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Utilities
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
ASHS
DBJP
Industrials
ASHS
DBJP
Basic Materials
ASHS
DBJP
Healthcare
ASHS
DBJP
Consumer Cyclical
ASHS
DBJP
Financial Services
ASHS
DBJP
Utilities
ASHS
DBJP
Energy
ASHS
DBJP
Consumer Defensive
ASHS
DBJP
Communication Services
ASHS
DBJP
Real Estate
ASHS
DBJP
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
ASHS
DBJP
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.
| ASHS | DBJP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | 1.49 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.56 | 5.22 | -0.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.25 | 19.97 | -5.72 |
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
| ASHS | DBJP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -30.70% | -4.33% | -26.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -48.49% | -7.27% | -41.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.48% | 2.71% | +1.77% |
Volatility
ASHS vs. DBJP - Volatility Comparison
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) and Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF (DBJP) have volatilities of 7.72% and 7.92%, 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASHS | DBJP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.72% | 7.92% | -0.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.92% | 15.56% | +2.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.32% | 19.90% | +3.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.60% | 19.18% | +7.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.60% | 19.31% | +6.29% |
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 1.25%.
| 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% |
DBJP Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF | 1.25% | 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 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DBJP has higher volatility (7.92%) compared to ASHS (7.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHS dropped -69.90% vs DBJP's -31.30%.
On 10-year performance, DBJP leads with 17.47% vs 4.06% for ASHS. On fees, DBJP is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, ASHS has been the lower-risk option at 7.72%. 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 17.47% return vs 4.06%. 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 1.25%, 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.
ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 2.72), 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 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