PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ASIU.L vs. RQFI.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ASIU.L vs. RQFI.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ASIU.L (Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc) and RQFI.L (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D) are both China Equities funds - ASIU.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD while RQFI.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 -1.09%/yr for RQFI.L. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.65% expense ratio.

Performance

ASIU.L vs. RQFI.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (ASIU.L) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ASIU.L is traded in USD, while RQFI.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the RQFI.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 RQFI.L's 9.31% 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*
—

RQFI.L

1D
-0.69%
1M
2.40%
YTD
9.31%
6M
13.50%
1Y
37.28%
3Y*
12.34%
5Y*
-1.09%
10Y*
5.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ASIU.L vs. RQFI.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ASIU.L
Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc		-6.80%36.59%18.62%-16.23%-26.27%-23.38%6.66%4.03%-10.21%-0.98%
RQFI.L
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D		9.31%27.41%13.28%-13.70%-26.48%-2.18%37.63%35.38%-28.18%2.80%

Correlation

The correlation between ASIU.L and RQFI.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

0.43

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

0.42

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 19, 2017

0.36

Over the past year, ASIU.L and RQFI.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. RQFI.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ASIU.L
RQFI.L

Consumer Cyclical

29.8%
6.7%

Communication Services

21.2%
0.8%

Financial Services

19.0%
20.4%

Technology

11.7%
26.3%

Healthcare

5.9%
4.9%

Industrials

4.4%
16.6%

Basic Materials

3.1%
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

2.8%
7.4%

Real Estate

1.5%
0.5%

Utilities

0.6%
3.0%

Energy

0.1%
2.8%

Consumer Cyclical

ASIU.L
29.8%
RQFI.L
6.7%

Communication Services

ASIU.L
21.2%
RQFI.L
0.8%

Financial Services

ASIU.L
19.0%
RQFI.L
20.4%

Technology

ASIU.L
11.7%
RQFI.L
26.3%

Healthcare

ASIU.L
5.9%
RQFI.L
4.9%

Industrials

ASIU.L
4.4%
RQFI.L
16.6%

Basic Materials

ASIU.L
3.1%
RQFI.L
10.7%

Consumer Defensive

ASIU.L
2.8%
RQFI.L
7.4%

Real Estate

ASIU.L
1.5%
RQFI.L
0.5%

Utilities

ASIU.L
0.6%
RQFI.L
3.0%

Energy

ASIU.L
0.1%
RQFI.L
2.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc

Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D

Often compared with ASIU.L:
ASIU.L vs. BNKS.LASIU.L vs. LCCN.LASIU.L vs. GLDASIU.L vs. C500.LASIU.L vs. HMCA.LASIU.L vs. FLXC.LASIU.L vs. JRCD.L
Often compared with RQFI.L:
RQFI.L vs. CA3S.LRQFI.L vs. CHIN.LRQFI.L vs. XCX6.LRQFI.L vs. HMCT.LRQFI.L vs. CEBG.LRQFI.L vs. XCNA.LRQFI.L vs. CM5S.L

Return for Risk

ASIU.L vs. RQFI.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ASIU.L
ASIU.L Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
ASIU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASIU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank
RQFI.L
RQFI.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
RQFI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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.

ASIU.L vs. RQFI.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 Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.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.LRQFI.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.26
2.45

-2.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.53
3.34

-2.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

1.42

-0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.30

5.76

-5.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.61

16.94

-16.34

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ASIU.L vs. RQFI.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASIU.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.26, which is lower than the RQFI.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASIU.L and RQFI.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

ASIU.LRQFI.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.26

2.45

-2.19

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.30

-0.05

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.26

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.22

0.28

-0.50

Drawdowns

ASIU.L vs. RQFI.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASIU.L drawdown since its inception was -64.71%, which is greater than RQFI.L's maximum drawdown of -50.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASIU.L and RQFI.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ASIU.LRQFI.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.71%

-50.90%

-13.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-18.29%

-6.59%

-11.70%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.50%

-27.19%

-0.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-58.89%

-45.48%

-13.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-50.90%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-40.19%

-14.75%

-25.44%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-36.13%

-28.60%

-7.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.13%

2.22%

+6.91%

Volatility

ASIU.L vs. RQFI.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc (ASIU.L) has a higher volatility of 8.90% compared to Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D (RQFI.L) at 5.81%. This indicates that ASIU.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RQFI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ASIU.LRQFI.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.90%

5.81%

+3.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.55%

10.36%

+5.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.39%

15.54%

+5.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

40.97%

22.63%

+18.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

39.95%

23.40%

+16.55%

ASIU.L vs. RQFI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ASIU.L and RQFI.L have an expense ratio of 0.65%.

Dividends

ASIU.L vs. RQFI.L - Dividend Comparison

ASIU.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RQFI.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASIU.L
Lyxor MSCI China ESG Leaders Extra (DR) UCITS ETF - Acc		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RQFI.L
Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 UCITS ETF 1D		1.44%1.77%1.46%1.99%1.88%0.94%1.26%0.76%2.23%1.92%1.70%0.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

ASIU.L and RQFI.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.

Both ETFs have the same 0.65% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ASIU.L and RQFI.L have the same expense ratio: 0.65% per year.

ASIU.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while RQFI.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Xtrackers.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ASIU.L and RQFI.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