CEB0.DE vs. ICGB.DE
CEB0.DE (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Dist) and ICGB.DE (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds from iShares - CEB0.DE tracks the Bloomberg Barclays China Treasury + Policy Bank Index while ICGB.DE tracks the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CEB0.DE returned 1.29% vs 9.80% for ICGB.DE. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEB0.DE charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for ICGB.DE.
Performance
CEB0.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEB0.DE achieves a 1.97% return, which is significantly lower than ICGB.DE's 7.85% return.
CEB0.DE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- 6M
- 1.89%
- YTD
- 1.97%
- 1Y
- 1.29%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ICGB.DE
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 1.25%
- 6M
- 7.38%
- YTD
- 7.85%
- 1Y
- 9.80%
- 3Y*
- 4.28%
- 5Y*
- 3.84%
- 10Y*
- —
CEB0.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
CEB0.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Dist | 1.97% | 0.43% | 6.85% |
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 7.85% | -7.16% | 8.55% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEB0.DE and ICGB.DE is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2024 | 0.23 |
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
CEB0.DE vs. ICGB.DE — Risk / Return Rank
CEB0.DE
ICGB.DE
CEB0.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Dist (CEB0.DE) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE). 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.
| CEB0.DE | ICGB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.14 | 1.34 | -0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.16 | 3.52 | -2.36 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.44 | 9.25 | -6.81 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CEB0.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEB0.DE drawdown since its inception was -1.83%, smaller than the maximum ICGB.DE drawdown of -13.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEB0.DE and ICGB.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEB0.DE | ICGB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.83% | -13.36% | +11.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.11% | -2.77% | +1.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -11.17% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -13.36% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.06% | -1.82% | +1.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.37% | -6.42% | +6.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.48% | 1.06% | -0.58% |
Volatility
CEB0.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Dist (CEB0.DE) is 0.57%, while iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE) has a volatility of 1.34%. This indicates that CEB0.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICGB.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEB0.DE | ICGB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.57% | 1.34% | -0.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.48% | 3.71% | -2.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.75% | 5.38% | -3.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.02% | 6.64% | -4.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.02% | 7.91% | -5.89% |
CEB0.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEB0.DE has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than ICGB.DE's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEB0.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Dividend Comparison
CEB0.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, more than ICGB.DE's 1.69% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEB0.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Dist | 1.71% | 1.84% | 1.43% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.69% | 1.92% | 2.22% | 2.58% | 2.80% | 2.71% | 2.63% | 0.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEB0.DE and ICGB.DE have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ICGB.DE is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ICGB.DE is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for CEB0.DE.
CEB0.DE tracks Bloomberg Barclays China Treasury + Policy Bank Index, while ICGB.DE tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for CEB0.DE and 0.35% for ICGB.DE.
Find the right allocation for CEB0.DE and ICGB.DE
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