CEBL.DE vs. ICGA.DE
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEBL.DE) and iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF USD Acc (ICGA.DE).
CEBL.DE and ICGA.DE are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CEBL.DE is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets Asia. It was launched on Aug 6, 2010. ICGA.DE is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI China. It was launched on Jun 20, 2019. Both CEBL.DE and ICGA.DE are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: CEBL.DE or ICGA.DE.
Key characteristics
| CEBL.DE | ICGA.DE | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 18.39% | 24.94% |
| 1Y Return | 20.35% | 16.56% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -0.52% | -7.23% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 4.95% | -1.22% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.33 | 0.68 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.91 | 1.20 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.25 | 1.15 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.74 | 0.33 |
| Martin Ratio | 6.79 | 1.99 |
| Ulcer Index | 3.03% | 9.37% |
| Daily Std Dev | 15.54% | 27.60% |
| Max Drawdown | -35.09% | -55.95% |
| Current Drawdown | -10.05% | -39.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEBL.DE and ICGA.DE is 0.89, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
CEBL.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, CEBL.DE achieves a 18.39% return, which is significantly lower than ICGA.DE's 24.94% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CEBL.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEBL.DE has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than ICGA.DE's 0.28% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
CEBL.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEBL.DE) and iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF USD Acc (ICGA.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.
Dividends
CEBL.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither CEBL.DE nor ICGA.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEBL.DE iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.69% | 1.86% |
ICGA.DE iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF USD Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
CEBL.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEBL.DE drawdown since its inception was -35.09%, smaller than the maximum ICGA.DE drawdown of -55.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEBL.DE and ICGA.DE. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
CEBL.DE vs. ICGA.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEBL.DE) is 6.17%, while iShares MSCI China UCITS ETF USD Acc (ICGA.DE) has a volatility of 11.04%. This indicates that CEBL.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICGA.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.