PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CA3S.L vs. CNUA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CA3S.L vs. CNUA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CA3S.L) and UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CA3S.L achieves a 14.81% return, which is significantly higher than CNUA.L's 11.84% return.


CA3S.L

1D
-0.54%
1M
4.48%
YTD
14.81%
6M
18.71%
1Y
51.07%
3Y*
13.88%
5Y*
10Y*

CNUA.L

1D
-0.68%
1M
2.91%
YTD
11.84%
6M
15.17%
1Y
44.25%
3Y*
12.83%
5Y*
3.76%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CA3S.L vs. CNUA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
CA3S.L
Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc
14.81%24.66%16.66%-16.63%3.94%
CNUA.L
UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc
11.84%22.98%16.55%-16.32%7.34%

Correlation

The correlation between CA3S.L and CNUA.L is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.97

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2022

0.86

The correlation between CA3S.L and CNUA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.86 (all time) to 0.97 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

CA3S.L vs. CNUA.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CA3S.L
CA3S.L Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
CA3S.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CA3S.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
CA3S.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
CA3S.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
CA3S.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank

CNUA.L
CNUA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
CNUA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNUA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNUA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
CNUA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNUA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

CA3S.L vs. CNUA.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 (CA3S.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.


CA3S.LCNUA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

1.50

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

8.16

6.63

+1.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

23.71

19.91

+3.81

CA3S.L vs. CNUA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CA3S.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.22, which is comparable to the CNUA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CA3S.L and CNUA.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


CA3S.LCNUA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.22

2.84

+0.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.45

0.41

+0.05

Drawdowns

CA3S.L vs. CNUA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CA3S.L drawdown since its inception was -35.12%, smaller than the maximum CNUA.L drawdown of -38.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CA3S.L and CNUA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CA3S.LCNUA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.12%

-38.31%

+3.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.23%

-6.64%

+0.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.15%

-21.43%

-4.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.31%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.01%

-2.17%

+1.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.51%

-14.93%

-0.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.15%

2.22%

-0.07%

Volatility

CA3S.L vs. CNUA.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CA3S.L) is 5.37%, while UBS ETF (IE) MSCI China A SF UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (CNUA.L) has a volatility of 5.67%. This indicates that CA3S.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNUA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CA3S.LCNUA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.37%

5.67%

-0.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.58%

10.52%

+0.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.80%

15.52%

+0.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.98%

21.25%

-0.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.98%

22.74%

-1.76%

CA3S.L vs. CNUA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CA3S.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than CNUA.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

CA3S.L vs. CNUA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CA3S.L nor CNUA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.97, CA3S.L and CNUA.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

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 0.35% for CA3S.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CA3S.L and 0.30% for CNUA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CA3S.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