C300.L vs. KSTR.L
C300.L (Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) and KSTR.L (KraneShares ICBCCS SSE STAR Market 50 Index UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both China Equities funds - C300.L tracks the S&P China A 300 Index while KSTR.L tracks the SSE Science and Technology Innovation Board 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, C300.L returned 14.87%/yr vs 19.20%/yr for KSTR.L. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. C300.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.82%/yr for KSTR.L.
Performance
C300.L vs. KSTR.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, C300.L achieves a 9.32% return, which is significantly lower than KSTR.L's 33.13% return.
C300.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -5.05%
- 6M
- 6.40%
- YTD
- 9.32%
- 1Y
- 33.73%
- 3Y*
- 14.87%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
KSTR.L
- 1D
- -5.63%
- 1M
- -7.01%
- 6M
- 17.12%
- YTD
- 33.13%
- 1Y
- 79.93%
- 3Y*
- 19.20%
- 5Y*
- -1.43%
- 10Y*
- —
C300.L vs. KSTR.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C300.L Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc | 9.32% | 33.78% | 14.79% | -11.81% | 1.72% |
KSTR.L KraneShares ICBCCS SSE STAR Market 50 Index UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 33.13% | 42.76% | 5.23% | -18.80% | -1.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between C300.L and KSTR.L is 0.72, 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 | 0.72 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2022 | 0.72 |
The correlation between C300.L and KSTR.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. KSTR.L — Risk / Return Rank
C300.L
KSTR.L
C300.L vs. KSTR.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 KraneShares ICBCCS SSE STAR Market 50 Index UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (KSTR.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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| C300.L | KSTR.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.34 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.43 | 3.37 | +1.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.47 | 10.31 | +2.16 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
C300.L vs. KSTR.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum C300.L drawdown since its inception was -31.77%, smaller than the maximum KSTR.L drawdown of -66.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for C300.L and KSTR.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| C300.L | KSTR.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.77% | -66.67% | +34.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.64% | -23.57% | +15.93% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.06% | -35.82% | +7.76% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -66.38% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.33% | -23.57% | +16.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.80% | -39.82% | +26.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.71% | 7.73% | -5.02% |
Volatility
C300.L vs. KSTR.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.L) is 9.32%, while KraneShares ICBCCS SSE STAR Market 50 Index UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (KSTR.L) has a volatility of 19.71%. This indicates that C300.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KSTR.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| C300.L | KSTR.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.32% | 19.71% | -10.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.38% | 34.05% | -18.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.90% | 41.03% | -21.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.34% | 34.61% | -12.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.34% | 34.55% | -12.21% |
C300.L vs. KSTR.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
C300.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than KSTR.L's 0.82% expense ratio.
Dividends
C300.L vs. KSTR.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither C300.L nor KSTR.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
C300.L and KSTR.L have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, C300.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
C300.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.82% for KSTR.L.
C300.L tracks S&P China A 300 Index, while KSTR.L tracks SSE Science and Technology Innovation Board 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for C300.L and 0.82% for KSTR.L.
Find the right allocation for C300.L and KSTR.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