CAS vs. ISVBF
CAS (Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF) and ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) are both China Equities funds. CAS is actively managed, while ISVBF is passively managed. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CAS charges 0.88%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for ISVBF.
Performance
CAS vs. ISVBF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
CAS
- 1D
- -2.90%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ISVBF
- 1D
- -1.91%
- 1M
- -3.63%
- YTD
- -12.61%
- 6M
- -13.33%
- 1Y
- -0.84%
- 3Y*
- 8.82%
- 5Y*
- -6.16%
- 10Y*
- —
CAS vs. ISVBF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
CAS Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF | 0.48% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -5.77% |
Correlation
The correlation between CAS and ISVBF is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026 | 0.32 |
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. ISVBF — Risk / Return Rank
CAS
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ISVBF
CAS vs. ISVBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF (CAS) and iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF). 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 | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.02 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | -0.04 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | -0.09 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CAS vs. ISVBF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CAS drawdown since its inception was -6.84%, smaller than the maximum ISVBF drawdown of -53.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAS and ISVBF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CAS | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.84% | -53.78% | +46.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -20.64% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -23.77% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -52.51% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.90% | -29.16% | +26.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.67% | -32.68% | +30.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 9.17% | — |
Volatility
CAS vs. ISVBF - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CAS | ISVBF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 8.35% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 27.04% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.91% | 30.91% | -2.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.91% | 30.31% | -1.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.91% | 30.15% | -1.24% |
CAS vs. ISVBF - Expense Ratio Comparison
CAS has a 0.88% expense ratio, which is higher than ISVBF's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
CAS vs. ISVBF - Dividend Comparison
Neither CAS nor ISVBF has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CAS and ISVBF have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ISVBF is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ISVBF is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.88% for CAS.
CAS and ISVBF have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Simplify and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.88% for CAS and 0.40% for ISVBF.
Find the right allocation for CAS and ISVBF
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