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

Performance

ASHS vs. FCA - 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 First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA). 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 20.07% return, which is significantly higher than FCA's 3.82% return. Over the past 10 years, ASHS has underperformed FCA with an annualized return of 4.06%, while FCA has yielded a comparatively higher 9.27% 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%

FCA

1D
-2.20%
1M
-6.29%
YTD
3.82%
6M
2.03%
1Y
28.89%
3Y*
19.12%
5Y*
3.23%
10Y*
9.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ASHS vs. FCA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
FCA
First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund
3.82%45.20%14.07%-8.28%-17.61%-0.65%11.80%18.72%-18.30%60.26%

Correlation

The correlation between ASHS and FCA is 0.58, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.58

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

0.60

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

0.59

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

0.58

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

0.54

The correlation between ASHS and FCA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

ASHS vs. FCA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ASHS
FCA

Technology

33.2%
12.1%

Industrials

18.7%
23.6%

Basic Materials

16.5%
18.7%

Healthcare

6.2%
2.9%

Consumer Cyclical

5.3%
1.0%

Financial Services

5.3%
20.2%

Utilities

2.3%
2.7%

Energy

2.2%
14.4%

Consumer Defensive

1.7%
0.5%

Communication Services

1.3%
2.7%

Real Estate

0.5%
1.2%

Technology

ASHS
33.2%
FCA
12.1%

Industrials

ASHS
18.7%
FCA
23.6%

Basic Materials

ASHS
16.5%
FCA
18.7%

Healthcare

ASHS
6.2%
FCA
2.9%

Consumer Cyclical

ASHS
5.3%
FCA
1.0%

Financial Services

ASHS
5.3%
FCA
20.2%

Utilities

ASHS
2.3%
FCA
2.7%

Energy

ASHS
2.2%
FCA
14.4%

Consumer Defensive

ASHS
1.7%
FCA
0.5%

Communication Services

ASHS
1.3%
FCA
2.7%

Real Estate

ASHS
0.5%
FCA
1.2%

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. FCA — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASHS
ASHS Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
ASHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASHS Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
ASHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASHS Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank

FCA
FCA Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
FCA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCA Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
FCA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCA Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
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. FCA - 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 First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA). 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.


ASHSFCADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.48

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.70

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.22

+0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.56

1.81

+2.76

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.25

5.93

+8.31

ASHS vs. FCA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASHS Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is higher than the FCA Sharpe Ratio of 1.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASHS and FCA, 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. FCA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASHS drawdown since its inception was -69.90%, which is greater than FCA's maximum drawdown of -45.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHS and FCA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ASHSFCADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-69.90%

-45.56%

-24.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.03%

-16.07%

+2.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-34.13%

-26.13%

-8.00%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-47.81%

-42.47%

-5.34%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.81%

-42.47%

-5.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-30.70%

-15.17%

-15.53%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-48.49%

-21.61%

-26.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.48%

4.88%

-0.40%

Volatility

ASHS vs. FCA - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) and First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) have volatilities of 7.72% and 7.95%, 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


ASHSFCADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.72%

7.95%

-0.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.92%

17.58%

+0.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.32%

23.00%

+0.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.60%

27.72%

-1.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.60%

26.69%

-1.09%

ASHS vs. FCA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASHS has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than FCA's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

ASHS vs. FCA - Dividend Comparison

ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FCA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.48%.


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%
FCA
First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund
2.48%2.67%5.17%5.70%6.00%4.91%4.12%3.73%3.10%2.30%2.51%4.13%

Frequently Asked Questions


ASHS and FCA have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCA has higher volatility (7.95%) compared to ASHS (7.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHS dropped -69.90% vs FCA's -45.56%.

On 10-year performance, FCA leads with 9.27% vs 4.06% for ASHS. On fees, ASHS is cheaper at 0.65% 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, FCA has performed better with a 9.27% return vs 4.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ASHS is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FCA.

FCA has the higher dividend yield at 2.48%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.

ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index, while FCA tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX China Index. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHS and 0.80% for FCA.

ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 1.26), 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 FCA

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