ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ASIL.L (Lyxor China Enterprise (HSCEI) UCITS ETF) and ACWL.L (Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ASIL.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China NR USD, while ACWL.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ASIL.L returned 0.63%/yr vs 13.73%/yr for ACWL.L. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ASIL.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for ACWL.L.

Performance

ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Lyxor China Enterprise (HSCEI) UCITS ETF (ASIL.L) and Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ASIL.L achieves a -6.20% return, which is significantly lower than ACWL.L's 12.44% return. Over the past 10 years, ASIL.L has underperformed ACWL.L with an annualized return of 0.63%, while ACWL.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.73% annualized return.

ASIL.L

• 1D: -2.60%
• 1M: -0.06%
• YTD: -6.20%
• 6M: -8.10%
• 1Y: 8.93%
• 3Y*: 6.75%
• 5Y*: -5.81%
• 10Y*: 0.63%

ACWL.L

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 6.05%
• YTD: 12.44%
• 6M: 12.71%
• 1Y: 30.24%
• 3Y*: 18.94%
• 5Y*: 12.39%
• 10Y*: 13.73%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ASIL.L Lyxor China Enterprise (HSCEI) UCITS ETF	-6.20%	27.56%	14.40%	-17.94%	-16.69%	-22.70%	-4.32%	9.43%	-6.32%	15.81%
ACWL.L Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF	12.44%	13.63%	21.43%	13.09%	-8.59%	20.41%	9.74%	18.01%	2.02%	11.14%

Correlation

The correlation between ASIL.L and ACWL.L is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.27
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.20
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2015	0.13

Over the past year, ASIL.L and ACWL.L have become more correlated (0.40) than their long-term average of 0.13, meaning their price movements have been converging.

ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ASIL.L	ACWL.L
Consumer Cyclical	29.8%	9.3%
Communication Services	21.2%	9.0%
Financial Services	19.0%	16.2%
Technology	11.7%	29.3%
Healthcare	5.9%	8.1%
Industrials	4.4%	10.9%
Basic Materials	3.1%	3.7%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	5.0%
Real Estate	1.5%	1.8%
Utilities	0.6%	2.6%
Energy	-	4.2%

Return for Risk

ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASIL.L

ASIL.L Risk / Return Rank: 15
ASIL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
ASIL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
ASIL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 15
ASIL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
ASIL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 13

ACWL.L

ACWL.L Risk / Return Rank: 87
ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
ACWL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
ACWL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
ACWL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
ACWL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor China Enterprise (HSCEI) UCITS ETF (ASIL.L) and Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L). 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.

	ASIL.L	ACWL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.45	3.06	-2.60
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.80	4.15	-3.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.59	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.50	4.26	-3.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.99	17.67	-16.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASIL.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.45, which is lower than the ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASIL.L and ACWL.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ASIL.L	ACWL.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.45	3.06	-2.60
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.20	1.90	-2.10
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.03	2.61	-2.58
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.00	2.36	-2.36

Drawdowns

ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASIL.L drawdown since its inception was -59.17%, which is greater than ACWL.L's maximum drawdown of -18.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASIL.L and ACWL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASIL.L	ACWL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.17%	-18.15%	-41.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.73%	-7.06%	-10.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.68%	-18.15%	-8.53%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-53.45%	-18.15%	-35.30%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-59.17%	-18.15%	-41.02%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.74%	-0.29%	-36.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.72%	-2.44%	-22.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.01%	1.71%	+7.30%

Volatility

ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor China Enterprise (HSCEI) UCITS ETF (ASIL.L) has a higher volatility of 8.03% compared to Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L) at 2.64%. This indicates that ASIL.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ASIL.L	ACWL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.03%	2.64%	+5.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.30%	7.02%	+7.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.71%	9.88%	+9.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.76%	16.54%	+12.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.11%	23.34%	+1.77%

ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASIL.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWL.L's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASIL.L vs. ACWL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither ASIL.L nor ACWL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ASIL.L and ACWL.L in my portfolio?

ASIL.L and ACWL.L have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ASIL.L or ACWL.L?

On fees, ACWL.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASIL.L or ACWL.L?

ACWL.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASIL.L.

What is the main difference between ASIL.L and ACWL.L?

ASIL.L is categorized as China Equities, while ACWL.L is Global Equities. ASIL.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while ACWL.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASIL.L and 0.45% for ACWL.L.