PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CC1U.L vs. AH50.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CC1U.L vs. AH50.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF-C USD (CC1U.L) and Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CC1U.L achieves a 0.83% return, which is significantly lower than AH50.L's 12.41% return. Over the past 10 years, CC1U.L has underperformed AH50.L with an annualized return of 4.02%, while AH50.L has yielded a comparatively higher 7.74% annualized return.


CC1U.L

1D
-1.55%
1M
-1.37%
YTD
0.83%
6M
1.62%
1Y
31.67%
3Y*
6.80%
5Y*
0.89%
10Y*
4.02%

AH50.L

1D
-0.30%
1M
1.76%
YTD
12.41%
6M
17.72%
1Y
34.29%
3Y*
16.08%
5Y*
0.20%
10Y*
7.74%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CC1U.L vs. AH50.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CC1U.L
Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF-C USD
0.83%39.49%1.53%-11.33%-9.32%-3.10%-1.85%12.90%-14.42%29.16%
AH50.L
Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D
12.41%26.76%17.77%-13.04%-21.01%-6.02%28.04%34.30%-21.35%34.04%

Correlation

The correlation between CC1U.L and AH50.L is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.84

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

0.83

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.81

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2016

0.83

The correlation between CC1U.L and AH50.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

CC1U.L vs. AH50.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CC1U.L
AH50.L

Technology

29.6%
27.6%

Consumer Cyclical

20.7%
7.5%

Industrials

13.4%
20.4%

Basic Materials

13.0%
14.3%

Communication Services

10.0%
1.8%

Healthcare

6.6%
6.1%

Utilities

3.4%
2.4%

Real Estate

1.5%
0.7%

Financial Services

1.3%
11.4%

Consumer Defensive

0.5%
5.3%

Energy

-

2.6%

Technology

CC1U.L
29.6%
AH50.L
27.6%

Consumer Cyclical

CC1U.L
20.7%
AH50.L
7.5%

Industrials

CC1U.L
13.4%
AH50.L
20.4%

Basic Materials

CC1U.L
13.0%
AH50.L
14.3%

Communication Services

CC1U.L
10.0%
AH50.L
1.8%

Healthcare

CC1U.L
6.6%
AH50.L
6.1%

Utilities

CC1U.L
3.4%
AH50.L
2.4%

Real Estate

CC1U.L
1.5%
AH50.L
0.7%

Financial Services

CC1U.L
1.3%
AH50.L
11.4%

Consumer Defensive

CC1U.L
0.5%
AH50.L
5.3%

Energy

CC1U.L

-

AH50.L
2.6%

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

CC1U.L vs. AH50.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CC1U.L
CC1U.L Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
CC1U.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CC1U.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
CC1U.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
CC1U.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
CC1U.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank

AH50.L
AH50.L Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
AH50.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AH50.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
AH50.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
AH50.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
AH50.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
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.

CC1U.L vs. AH50.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF-C USD (CC1U.L) and Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.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.


CC1U.LAH50.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.53

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.64

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.34

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.94

4.11

-2.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.31

12.57

-8.25

CC1U.L vs. AH50.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CC1U.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is comparable to the AH50.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CC1U.L and AH50.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


CC1U.LAH50.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.37

1.89

-0.53

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.03

0.01

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.17

0.33

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.18

0.33

-0.15

Drawdowns

CC1U.L vs. AH50.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CC1U.L drawdown since its inception was -51.06%, roughly equal to the maximum AH50.L drawdown of -50.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CC1U.L and AH50.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CC1U.LAH50.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-51.06%

-50.58%

-0.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.29%

-8.30%

-7.99%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-39.24%

-25.95%

-13.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-43.08%

-45.27%

+2.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-51.06%

-50.58%

-0.48%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.25%

-8.78%

-1.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.27%

-21.40%

-0.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.32%

2.72%

+4.60%

Volatility

CC1U.L vs. AH50.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF-C USD (CC1U.L) has a higher volatility of 7.86% compared to Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D (AH50.L) at 6.50%. This indicates that CC1U.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AH50.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CC1U.LAH50.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.86%

6.50%

+1.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.58%

13.07%

+2.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.09%

18.04%

+5.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.95%

24.33%

+2.62%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.25%

23.38%

+0.87%

CC1U.L vs. AH50.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CC1U.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than AH50.L's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

CC1U.L vs. AH50.L - Dividend Comparison

CC1U.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AH50.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.08%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
AH50.L
Xtrackers Harvest FTSE China A-H 50 UCITS ETF 1D
2.08%2.79%2.37%2.72%3.00%1.78%1.57%
CC1U.L
Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF-C USD
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CC1U.L and AH50.L have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CC1U.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CC1U.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for AH50.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI China NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CC1U.L and 0.65% for AH50.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CC1U.L and AH50.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