C300.L vs. FWRA.L
C300.L (Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) and FWRA.L (Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation) are both exchange-traded funds - C300.L is a China Equities fund tracking the S&P China A 300 Index, while FWRA.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the FTSE All-World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, C300.L returned 51.82% vs 29.69% for FWRA.L. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. C300.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FWRA.L.
Performance
C300.L vs. FWRA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, C300.L achieves a 15.23% return, which is significantly higher than FWRA.L's 11.73% return.
C300.L
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 3.84%
- YTD
- 15.23%
- 6M
- 20.38%
- 1Y
- 51.82%
- 3Y*
- 16.69%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FWRA.L
- 1D
- -0.65%
- 1M
- 4.86%
- YTD
- 11.73%
- 6M
- 13.36%
- 1Y
- 29.69%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
C300.L vs. FWRA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
C300.L Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc | 15.23% | 33.78% | 14.79% | -7.16% |
FWRA.L Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation | 11.73% | 22.37% | 18.07% | 9.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between C300.L and FWRA.L is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023 | 0.38 |
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
C300.L vs. FWRA.L — Risk / Return Rank
C300.L
FWRA.L
C300.L vs. FWRA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.L) and Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.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.
| C300.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | 1.44 | +0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.55 | 3.37 | +4.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.22 | 14.12 | +9.10 |
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
| C300.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.01 | 2.39 | +0.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.54 | 1.57 | -1.02 |
Drawdowns
C300.L vs. FWRA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum C300.L drawdown since its inception was -31.77%, which is greater than FWRA.L's maximum drawdown of -16.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for C300.L and FWRA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| C300.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.77% | -16.60% | -15.17% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.83% | -8.74% | +1.91% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.06% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.09% | -0.65% | -0.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.10% | -1.93% | -12.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.23% | 2.09% | +0.14% |
Volatility
C300.L vs. FWRA.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.L) has a higher volatility of 6.04% compared to Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (FWRA.L) at 3.79%. This indicates that C300.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FWRA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| C300.L | FWRA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.04% | 3.79% | +2.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.14% | 9.86% | +2.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.14% | 12.33% | +4.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.08% | 13.53% | +8.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.08% | 13.53% | +8.55% |
C300.L vs. FWRA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
C300.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FWRA.L's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
C300.L vs. FWRA.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither C300.L nor FWRA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
C300.L and FWRA.L have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FWRA.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FWRA.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for C300.L.
C300.L is categorized as China Equities, while FWRA.L is Global Equities. C300.L tracks S&P China A 300 Index, while FWRA.L tracks FTSE All-World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for C300.L and 0.15% for FWRA.L.
Find the right allocation for C300.L and FWRA.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