CEMA.L vs. C500.L
CEMA.L (iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc) and C500.L (Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - CEMA.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM Asia Index Net, while C500.L is a China Equities fund tracking the S&P China A MidCap 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CEMA.L returned 21.86%/yr vs 3.42%/yr for C500.L. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEMA.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for C500.L.
Performance
CEMA.L vs. C500.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
CEMA.L
- 1D
- -0.48%
- 1M
- -7.06%
- 6M
- 16.81%
- YTD
- 22.45%
- 1Y
- 40.02%
- 3Y*
- 21.86%
- 5Y*
- 7.43%
- 10Y*
- 10.13%
C500.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- 6M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- 0.00%
- 1Y
- 0.00%
- 3Y*
- 3.42%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CEMA.L vs. C500.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEMA.L iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc | 22.45% | 33.97% | 12.43% | 6.65% | -4.67% |
C500.L Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc | 0.00% | 6.99% | 12.50% | -9.06% | 11.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEMA.L and C500.L is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2022 | 0.48 |
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
CEMA.L vs. C500.L — Risk / Return Rank
CEMA.L
C500.L
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CEMA.L vs. C500.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc (CEMA.L) and Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C500.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.
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.
| CEMA.L | C500.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.89 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.20 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CEMA.L vs. C500.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEMA.L drawdown since its inception was -45.51%, which is greater than C500.L's maximum drawdown of -35.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMA.L and C500.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEMA.L | C500.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.51% | -35.90% | -9.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.77% | 0.00% | -13.77% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.95% | -27.05% | +7.10% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.96% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.51% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.59% | -11.28% | +1.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.52% | -14.01% | -0.51% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.34% | 0.00% | +4.34% |
Volatility
CEMA.L vs. C500.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc (CEMA.L) has a higher volatility of 10.19% compared to Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C500.L) at 0.00%. This indicates that CEMA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than C500.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEMA.L | C500.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.19% | 0.00% | +10.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.60% | 0.00% | +21.60% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.77% | 0.00% | +23.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.87% | 23.51% | -2.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.15% | 23.51% | -3.36% |
CEMA.L vs. C500.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEMA.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than C500.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEMA.L vs. C500.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CEMA.L nor C500.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CEMA.L and C500.L have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CEMA.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CEMA.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for C500.L.
CEMA.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while C500.L is China Equities. CEMA.L tracks MSCI EM Asia Index Net, while C500.L tracks S&P China A MidCap 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CEMA.L and 0.35% for C500.L.
Find the right allocation for CEMA.L and C500.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