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

Performance

ASHS vs. GXC - 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 SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC). 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 15.10% return, which is significantly higher than GXC's -3.93% return. Over the past 10 years, ASHS has underperformed GXC with an annualized return of 3.27%, while GXC has yielded a comparatively higher 5.25% annualized return.


ASHS

1D
-0.17%
1M
-0.19%
YTD
15.10%
6M
23.90%
1Y
57.65%
3Y*
13.41%
5Y*
3.97%
10Y*
3.27%

GXC

1D
-2.27%
1M
-2.82%
YTD
-3.93%
6M
-5.13%
1Y
12.26%
3Y*
10.65%
5Y*
-4.55%
10Y*
5.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ASHS vs. GXC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ASHS
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF
15.10%39.48%2.68%-10.03%-24.78%17.66%28.22%24.53%-35.91%7.90%
GXC
SPDR S&P China ETF
-3.93%30.84%14.60%-9.93%-22.12%-19.70%28.31%23.07%-19.39%51.66%

Correlation

The correlation between ASHS and GXC is 0.71, 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

0.71

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

0.73

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

0.70

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

0.67

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2014

0.65

The correlation between ASHS and GXC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

ASHS vs. GXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ASHS
GXC

Technology

29.8%
11.9%

Industrials

19.7%
9.1%

Basic Materials

19.4%
7.0%

Healthcare

7.2%
6.7%

Financial Services

6.3%
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

5.8%
22.9%

Energy

3.2%
3.5%

Communication Services

3.2%
14.3%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
3.7%

Utilities

2.2%
1.8%

Real Estate

0.7%
1.9%

Technology

ASHS
29.8%
GXC
11.9%

Industrials

ASHS
19.7%
GXC
9.1%

Basic Materials

ASHS
19.4%
GXC
7.0%

Healthcare

ASHS
7.2%
GXC
6.7%

Financial Services

ASHS
6.3%
GXC
17.1%

Consumer Cyclical

ASHS
5.8%
GXC
22.9%

Energy

ASHS
3.2%
GXC
3.5%

Communication Services

ASHS
3.2%
GXC
14.3%

Consumer Defensive

ASHS
2.6%
GXC
3.7%

Utilities

ASHS
2.2%
GXC
1.8%

Real Estate

ASHS
0.7%
GXC
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. GXC — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASHS
ASHS Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
ASHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASHS Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
ASHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASHS Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank

GXC
GXC Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
GXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
GXC Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
GXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
GXC Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
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. GXC - 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 SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC). 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.


ASHSGXCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.91

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.13

+0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.13

0.90

+3.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.72

2.02

+11.71

ASHS vs. GXC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASHS Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is higher than the GXC Sharpe Ratio of 0.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASHS and GXC, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ASHSGXCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.57

0.65

+1.91

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.15

-0.16

+0.31

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.13

0.20

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.19

0.16

+0.03

Drawdowns

ASHS vs. GXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASHS drawdown since its inception was -69.90%, roughly equal to the maximum GXC drawdown of -71.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHS and GXC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ASHSGXCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-69.90%

-71.96%

+2.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.03%

-13.73%

-0.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-34.13%

-25.54%

-8.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-47.81%

-53.99%

+6.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.81%

-60.23%

+12.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-33.57%

-32.10%

-1.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-48.57%

-28.82%

-19.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.21%

6.09%

-1.88%

Volatility

ASHS vs. GXC - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) has a higher volatility of 7.33% compared to SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) at 6.64%. This indicates that ASHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ASHSGXCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.33%

6.64%

+0.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.00%

13.59%

+3.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.59%

18.88%

+3.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.46%

28.97%

-2.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.57%

26.09%

-0.52%

ASHS vs. GXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASHS has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than GXC's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

ASHS vs. GXC - Dividend Comparison

ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%.


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%
GXC
SPDR S&P China ETF
2.50%2.40%2.81%3.70%2.67%1.35%1.04%1.60%2.03%1.84%2.05%2.85%

Frequently Asked Questions


ASHS and GXC have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ASHS has higher volatility (7.33%) compared to GXC (6.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHS dropped -69.90% vs GXC's -71.96%.

On 10-year performance, GXC leads with 5.25% vs 3.27% for ASHS. On fees, GXC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, GXC has been the lower-risk option at 6.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GXC has performed better with a 5.25% return vs 3.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GXC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHS.

GXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.50%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.

ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index, while GXC tracks S&P China BMI Index. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHS and 0.59% for GXC.

ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 0.65), 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 GXC

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