PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CETF.AX vs. GRNV.AX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CETF.AX vs. GRNV.AX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a A$10,000 investment in VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF (CETF.AX) and VanEck MSCI Australian Sustainable Equity ETF (GRNV.AX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CETF.AX achieves a -0.98% return, which is significantly higher than GRNV.AX's -5.59% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CETF.AX having a 5.29% annualized return and GRNV.AX not far behind at 5.10%.


CETF.AX

1D
-1.86%
1M
-1.13%
6M
-2.24%
YTD
-0.98%
1Y
11.65%
3Y*
9.83%
5Y*
0.64%
10Y*
5.29%

GRNV.AX

1D
-0.16%
1M
-0.61%
6M
-5.39%
YTD
-5.59%
1Y
-5.50%
3Y*
6.15%
5Y*
3.91%
10Y*
5.10%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CETF.AX vs. GRNV.AX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CETF.AX
VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF
-0.98%12.88%30.64%-13.18%-16.50%-1.23%18.52%33.28%-18.45%21.26%
GRNV.AX
VanEck MSCI Australian Sustainable Equity ETF
-5.59%8.50%11.86%14.17%-13.00%18.36%2.26%24.45%-4.99%6.04%

Correlation

The correlation between CETF.AX and GRNV.AX is 0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

0.05

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

-0.02

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

0.06

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

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2016

0.09

The correlation between CETF.AX and GRNV.AX shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (3 years) to 0.09 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF

Return for Risk

CETF.AX vs. GRNV.AX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CETF.AX
CETF.AX Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
CETF.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CETF.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
CETF.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
CETF.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
CETF.AX Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank

GRNV.AX
GRNV.AX Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
GRNV.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GRNV.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
GRNV.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
GRNV.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
GRNV.AX Martin Ratio Rank: 77
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.

CETF.AX vs. GRNV.AX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF (CETF.AX) and VanEck MSCI Australian Sustainable Equity ETF (GRNV.AX). 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.


CETF.AXGRNV.AXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.39

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

0.97

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.97

-0.24

+1.21

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.38

-0.48

+2.86

CETF.AX vs. GRNV.AX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CETF.AX Sharpe Ratio is 0.76, which is higher than the GRNV.AX Sharpe Ratio of -0.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CETF.AX and GRNV.AX, 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...

Drawdowns

CETF.AX vs. GRNV.AX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CETF.AX drawdown since its inception was -41.32%, which is greater than GRNV.AX's maximum drawdown of -37.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CETF.AX and GRNV.AX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CETF.AXGRNV.AXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.32%

-37.16%

-4.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.01%

-19.26%

+7.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.05%

-19.26%

+0.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.90%

-20.56%

-13.34%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.95%

-37.16%

-3.79%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.36%

-12.07%

+0.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-23.78%

-6.20%

-17.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.95%

9.91%

-4.96%

Volatility

CETF.AX vs. GRNV.AX - Volatility Comparison

VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF (CETF.AX) has a higher volatility of 5.19% compared to VanEck MSCI Australian Sustainable Equity ETF (GRNV.AX) at 3.24%. This indicates that CETF.AX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GRNV.AX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CETF.AXGRNV.AXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.19%

3.24%

+1.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.75%

12.34%

-0.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.18%

16.82%

-1.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.75%

14.97%

+4.78%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.06%

15.51%

+4.55%

Dividends

CETF.AX vs. GRNV.AX - Dividend Comparison

CETF.AX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, less than GRNV.AX's 2.10% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CETF.AX
VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF
1.87%1.94%1.55%2.94%2.80%1.80%1.30%1.28%11.56%1.08%1.16%3.19%
GRNV.AX
VanEck MSCI Australian Sustainable Equity ETF
2.10%3.34%1.53%1.72%0.62%2.33%3.88%4.82%3.98%4.10%0.76%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CETF.AX and GRNV.AX have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CETF.AX is categorized as China Equities, while GRNV.AX is Global Equities. CETF.AX tracks FTSE China A50 Net Tax AUD Index, while GRNV.AX tracks VanEck MSCI Australian Sustainable Equity Index.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CETF.AX and GRNV.AX

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