CEBG.L vs. DFNG.L
CEBG.L (VanEck New China ESG UCITS ETF A) and DFNG.L (VanEck Defense ETF A USD Acc GBP) are both exchange-traded funds - CEBG.L is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China NR USD, while DFNG.L is a Aerospace & Defense fund tracking the MarketVector Global Defense Industry index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CEBG.L returned -0.04%/yr vs 39.23%/yr for DFNG.L. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEBG.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for DFNG.L.
Performance
CEBG.L vs. DFNG.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEBG.L achieves a -3.84% return, which is significantly lower than DFNG.L's 3.59% return.
CEBG.L
- 1D
- -0.71%
- 1M
- -2.19%
- YTD
- -3.84%
- 6M
- -5.52%
- 1Y
- 9.77%
- 3Y*
- -0.04%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DFNG.L
- 1D
- 0.47%
- 1M
- -3.43%
- YTD
- 3.59%
- 6M
- 5.95%
- 1Y
- 17.04%
- 3Y*
- 39.23%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CEBG.L vs. DFNG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CEBG.L VanEck New China ESG UCITS ETF A | -3.84% | 15.45% | 1.26% | -19.01% |
DFNG.L VanEck Defense ETF A USD Acc GBP | 3.59% | 56.54% | 46.20% | 22.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEBG.L and DFNG.L is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2023 | 0.13 |
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
CEBG.L vs. DFNG.L — Risk / Return Rank
CEBG.L
DFNG.L
CEBG.L vs. DFNG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck New China ESG UCITS ETF A (CEBG.L) and VanEck Defense ETF A USD Acc GBP (DFNG.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.
| CEBG.L | DFNG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | 1.14 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.73 | 0.92 | -0.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.65 | 2.28 | -0.62 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CEBG.L | DFNG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.62 | 0.70 | -0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.16 | 1.97 | -2.14 |
Drawdowns
CEBG.L vs. DFNG.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEBG.L drawdown since its inception was -46.41%, which is greater than DFNG.L's maximum drawdown of -18.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEBG.L and DFNG.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEBG.L | DFNG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -46.41% | -18.38% | -28.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.28% | -18.38% | +5.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.10% | -18.38% | -11.72% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.24% | -15.37% | -8.87% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.43% | -3.13% | -21.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.89% | 7.46% | -1.57% |
Volatility
CEBG.L vs. DFNG.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck New China ESG UCITS ETF A (CEBG.L) is 4.18%, while VanEck Defense ETF A USD Acc GBP (DFNG.L) has a volatility of 7.88%. This indicates that CEBG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DFNG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEBG.L | DFNG.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.18% | 7.88% | -3.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.61% | 18.71% | -8.10% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.81% | 24.17% | -8.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.29% | 20.38% | +3.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.29% | 20.38% | +3.91% |
CEBG.L vs. DFNG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEBG.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than DFNG.L's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEBG.L vs. DFNG.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CEBG.L nor DFNG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CEBG.L and DFNG.L have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, DFNG.L is cheaper at 0.55% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
DFNG.L is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CEBG.L.
CEBG.L is categorized as China Equities, while DFNG.L is Aerospace & Defense. CEBG.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while DFNG.L tracks MarketVector Global Defense Industry index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CEBG.L and 0.55% for DFNG.L.
Find the right allocation for CEBG.L and DFNG.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