CAS vs. GXC
CAS (Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF) and GXC (SPDR S&P China ETF) are both China Equities funds. CAS is actively managed, while GXC is passively managed. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CAS charges 0.88%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for GXC.
Performance
CAS vs. GXC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
CAS
- 1D
- -0.94%
- 1M
- 2.69%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GXC
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- -2.48%
- 6M
- -11.50%
- YTD
- -7.60%
- 1Y
- 3.21%
- 3Y*
- 9.01%
- 5Y*
- -4.25%
- 10Y*
- 4.39%
CAS vs. GXC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
CAS Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF | -1.43% |
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | -3.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between CAS and GXC is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026 | 0.54 |
CAS vs. GXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CAS
GXC
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
CAS
GXC
Basic Materials
CAS
-
GXC
Communication Services
CAS
-
GXC
Consumer Cyclical
CAS
-
GXC
Consumer Defensive
CAS
-
GXC
Energy
CAS
-
GXC
Healthcare
CAS
-
GXC
Industrials
CAS
-
GXC
Real Estate
CAS
-
GXC
Technology
CAS
-
GXC
Utilities
CAS
-
GXC
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
CAS vs. GXC — Risk / Return Rank
CAS
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
GXC
CAS vs. GXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF (CAS) and SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC). 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.
| CAS | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.04 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 0.18 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 0.41 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CAS vs. GXC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CAS drawdown since its inception was -7.26%, smaller than the maximum GXC drawdown of -71.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAS and GXC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CAS | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.26% | -71.96% | +64.70% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -17.77% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -25.54% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -51.69% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -60.23% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.94% | -34.70% | +29.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.90% | -28.85% | +25.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 7.74% | — |
Volatility
CAS vs. GXC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CAS | GXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.06% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.84% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 30.04% | 19.16% | +10.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.04% | 28.96% | +1.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.04% | 26.03% | +4.01% |
CAS vs. GXC - Expense Ratio Comparison
CAS has a 0.88% expense ratio, which is higher than GXC's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
CAS vs. GXC - Dividend Comparison
CAS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, less than GXC's 2.24% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CAS Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF | 0.36% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | 2.24% | 2.40% | 2.81% | 3.70% | 2.67% | 1.35% | 1.04% | 1.60% | 2.03% | 1.84% | 2.05% | 2.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CAS and GXC have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GXC is cheaper at 0.59% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GXC is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.88% for CAS.
GXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.24%, compared with 0.36% for CAS.
They also come from different issuers: Simplify and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.88% for CAS and 0.59% for GXC.
Find the right allocation for CAS and GXC
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