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

Performance

ASHS vs. MAGC - 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 Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC). 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 15.30% return, which is significantly higher than MAGC's -15.36% return.


ASHS

1D
0.78%
1M
-1.03%
YTD
15.30%
6M
23.86%
1Y
59.58%
3Y*
13.47%
5Y*
4.14%
10Y*
3.28%

MAGC

1D
4.10%
1M
-2.34%
YTD
-15.36%
6M
-17.67%
1Y
-15.61%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ASHS vs. MAGC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
ASHS
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF
15.30%39.48%-14.46%
MAGC
Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF
-15.36%16.35%-14.54%

Correlation

The correlation between ASHS and MAGC is 0.52, 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

0.52

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2024

0.57

The correlation between ASHS and MAGC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

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. MAGC — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASHS
ASHS Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
ASHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASHS Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
ASHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASHS Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank

MAGC
MAGC Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
MAGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MAGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
MAGC Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
MAGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
Calmar Ratio Rank
MAGC Martin Ratio Rank: 55
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. MAGC - 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 Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC). 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.


ASHSMAGCDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.65

-0.59

+3.24

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.35

-0.73

+4.08

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

0.92

+0.51

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.25

-0.44

+4.69

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

14.22

-0.85

+15.07

ASHS vs. MAGC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASHS Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is higher than the MAGC Sharpe Ratio of -0.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASHS and MAGC, 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


ASHSMAGCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.65

-0.59

+3.24

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.16

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.19

-0.29

+0.48

Drawdowns

ASHS vs. MAGC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASHS drawdown since its inception was -69.90%, which is greater than MAGC's maximum drawdown of -32.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHS and MAGC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ASHSMAGCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-69.90%

-32.86%

-37.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.03%

-32.86%

+18.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-34.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-47.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-33.45%

-28.88%

-4.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-48.57%

-15.12%

-33.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.19%

16.98%

-12.79%

Volatility

ASHS vs. MAGC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) is 7.40%, while Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGC) has a volatility of 10.63%. This indicates that ASHS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MAGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ASHSMAGCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.40%

10.63%

-3.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.00%

19.54%

-2.54%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.59%

26.65%

-4.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.46%

34.36%

-7.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.58%

34.36%

-8.78%

ASHS vs. MAGC - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

ASHS vs. MAGC - Dividend Comparison

ASHS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MAGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.85%.


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%
MAGC
Roundhill China Magnificent Seven ETF
4.85%4.10%1.02%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ASHS and MAGC have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MAGC has higher volatility (10.63%) compared to ASHS (7.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHS dropped -69.90% vs MAGC's -32.86%.

On 1-year performance, ASHS leads with 59.58% vs -15.61% for MAGC. On fees, MAGC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, ASHS has been the lower-risk option at 7.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, ASHS has performed better with a 59.58% return vs -15.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

MAGC has the higher dividend yield at 4.85%, compared with 0.00% for ASHS.

They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHS and 0.59% for MAGC.

ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs -0.59), 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 MAGC

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