ASIL.L vs. HMCA.L
ASIL.L (Lyxor China Enterprise (HSCEI) UCITS ETF) and HMCA.L (HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds - ASIL.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while HMCA.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ASIL.L returned -5.81%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for HMCA.L. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ASIL.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for HMCA.L.
Performance
ASIL.L vs. HMCA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
ASIL.L is traded in GBp, while HMCA.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the HMCA.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASIL.L achieves a -6.20% return, which is significantly lower than HMCA.L's 9.35% 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%
HMCA.L
- 1D
- 0.14%
- 1M
- 2.79%
- YTD
- 9.35%
- 6M
- 12.47%
- 1Y
- 38.67%
- 3Y*
- 8.45%
- 5Y*
- 0.16%
- 10Y*
- —
ASIL.L vs. HMCA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASIL.L Lyxor China Enterprise (HSCEI) UCITS ETF | -6.20% | 27.56% | 14.40% | -17.94% | -16.69% | -22.70% | -4.32% | 9.43% | -5.53% |
HMCA.L HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF | 9.35% | 17.38% | 13.48% | -18.58% | -17.12% | 4.17% | 39.06% | 30.18% | -12.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASIL.L and HMCA.L is 0.59, 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 | 0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2018 | 0.70 |
The correlation between ASIL.L and HMCA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.70 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ASIL.L vs. HMCA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Financial Services
Technology
Healthcare
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Utilities
Energy
-
Consumer Cyclical
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Communication Services
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Financial Services
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Technology
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Healthcare
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Industrials
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Basic Materials
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Consumer Defensive
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Real Estate
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Utilities
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
Energy
ASIL.L
-
HMCA.L
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
ASIL.L vs. HMCA.L — Risk / Return Rank
ASIL.L
HMCA.L
ASIL.L vs. HMCA.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 HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCA.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 | HMCA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.54 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.44 | -0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.50 | 5.50 | -5.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.99 | 15.66 | -14.67 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ASIL.L | HMCA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.45 | 2.51 | -2.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.20 | 0.01 | -0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.03 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.00 | 0.28 | -0.28 |
Drawdowns
ASIL.L vs. HMCA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASIL.L drawdown since its inception was -59.17%, which is greater than HMCA.L's maximum drawdown of -44.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASIL.L and HMCA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASIL.L | HMCA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -59.17% | -44.23% | -14.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.73% | -7.00% | -10.73% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.68% | -26.19% | -0.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.45% | -41.62% | -11.83% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -59.17% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -36.74% | -9.73% | -27.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.72% | -17.97% | -6.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.01% | 2.46% | +6.55% |
Volatility
ASIL.L vs. HMCA.L - Volatility Comparison
Lyxor China Enterprise (HSCEI) UCITS ETF (ASIL.L) has a higher volatility of 8.03% compared to HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF (HMCA.L) at 5.42%. This indicates that ASIL.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HMCA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASIL.L | HMCA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.03% | 5.42% | +2.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.30% | 10.37% | +3.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.71% | 15.35% | +4.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.76% | 21.22% | +7.54% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.11% | 22.88% | +2.23% |
ASIL.L vs. HMCA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ASIL.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than HMCA.L's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
ASIL.L vs. HMCA.L - Dividend Comparison
ASIL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HMCA.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASIL.L Lyxor China Enterprise (HSCEI) UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
HMCA.L HSBC MSCI CHINA A UCITS ETF | 1.67% | 1.76% | 1.97% | 2.20% | 1.76% | 1.09% | 0.88% | 1.78% | 0.29% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ASIL.L and HMCA.L have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HMCA.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HMCA.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASIL.L.
ASIL.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while HMCA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASIL.L and 0.30% for HMCA.L.
Find the right allocation for ASIL.L and HMCA.L
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