ASIU.L vs. CNUA.L
ASIU.L (Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc) and CNUA.L (UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) are both China Equities funds - ASIU.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while CNUA.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ASIU.L returned -6.88%/yr vs 2.67%/yr for CNUA.L. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ASIU.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for CNUA.L.
Performance
ASIU.L vs. CNUA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
ASIU.L is traded in USD, while CNUA.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CNUA.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASIU.L achieves a -6.80% return, which is significantly lower than CNUA.L's 11.56% return.
ASIU.L
- 1D
- -0.43%
- 1M
- -1.65%
- YTD
- -6.80%
- 6M
- -8.35%
- 1Y
- 5.55%
- 3Y*
- 9.71%
- 5Y*
- -6.88%
- 10Y*
- —
CNUA.L
- 1D
- -0.63%
- 1M
- 2.03%
- YTD
- 11.56%
- 6M
- 16.02%
- 1Y
- 42.88%
- 3Y*
- 15.74%
- 5Y*
- 2.67%
- 10Y*
- —
ASIU.L vs. CNUA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASIU.L Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc | -6.80% | 36.59% | 18.62% | -16.23% | -26.27% | -23.38% | 5.12% |
CNUA.L UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc | 11.56% | 32.26% | 14.61% | -11.91% | -24.67% | 9.25% | 48.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASIU.L and CNUA.L is 0.63, 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 | 0.63 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2020 | 0.36 |
Over the past year, ASIU.L and CNUA.L have become more correlated (0.63) than their long-term average of 0.36, meaning their price movements have been converging.
ASIU.L vs. CNUA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Financial Services
Technology
Healthcare
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Utilities
Energy
Consumer Cyclical
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Communication Services
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Financial Services
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Technology
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Healthcare
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Industrials
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Basic Materials
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Consumer Defensive
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Real Estate
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Utilities
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
Energy
ASIU.L
CNUA.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
ASIU.L vs. CNUA.L — Risk / Return Rank
ASIU.L
CNUA.L
ASIU.L vs. CNUA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (ASIU.L) and UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.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.
| ASIU.L | CNUA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.46 | -0.40 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.30 | 6.03 | -5.73 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.61 | 18.66 | -18.05 |
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
| ASIU.L | CNUA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.26 | 2.62 | -2.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.30 | 0.12 | -0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.22 | 0.41 | -0.63 |
Drawdowns
ASIU.L vs. CNUA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASIU.L drawdown since its inception was -64.71%, which is greater than CNUA.L's maximum drawdown of -43.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASIU.L and CNUA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASIU.L | CNUA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -64.71% | -43.75% | -20.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.29% | -7.08% | -11.21% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.50% | -22.00% | -5.50% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -58.89% | -41.06% | -17.83% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -40.19% | -2.89% | -37.30% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -36.13% | -19.47% | -16.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.13% | 2.29% | +6.84% |
Volatility
ASIU.L vs. CNUA.L - Volatility Comparison
Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (ASIU.L) has a higher volatility of 8.90% compared to UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L) at 6.41%. This indicates that ASIU.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CNUA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASIU.L | CNUA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.90% | 6.41% | +2.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.55% | 11.33% | +4.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.39% | 16.30% | +5.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 40.97% | 22.82% | +18.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 39.95% | 24.49% | +15.46% |
ASIU.L vs. CNUA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ASIU.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CNUA.L's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
ASIU.L vs. CNUA.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither ASIU.L nor CNUA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
ASIU.L and CNUA.L have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNUA.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNUA.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASIU.L.
ASIU.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while CNUA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASIU.L and 0.30% for CNUA.L.
Find the right allocation for ASIU.L and CNUA.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