CETF.AX vs. MVB.AX

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

CETF.AX (VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF) and MVB.AX (VanEck Australian Banks ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CETF.AX is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China A50 Net Tax AUD Index, while MVB.AX is a Financials Equities fund tracking the VanEck Australian Banks Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CETF.AX returned 4.83%/yr vs 11.47%/yr for MVB.AX. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

CETF.AX vs. MVB.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 Australian Banks ETF (MVB.AX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CETF.AX achieves a -5.22% return, which is significantly lower than MVB.AX's 5.75% return. Over the past 10 years, CETF.AX has underperformed MVB.AX with an annualized return of 4.83%, while MVB.AX has yielded a comparatively higher 11.47% annualized return.

CETF.AX

• 1D: -4.28%
• 1M: -4.95%
• 6M: -5.93%
• YTD: -5.22%
• 1Y: 6.70%
• 3Y*: 8.43%
• 5Y*: -0.23%
• 10Y*: 4.83%

MVB.AX

• 1D: -0.52%
• 1M: 3.33%
• 6M: 4.61%
• YTD: 5.75%
• 1Y: 10.24%
• 3Y*: 19.21%
• 5Y*: 14.36%
• 10Y*: 11.47%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CETF.AX VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF	-5.22%	12.88%	30.64%	-13.18%	-16.50%	-1.23%	18.52%	33.28%	-18.45%	21.26%
MVB.AX VanEck Australian Banks ETF	5.75%	13.33%	29.84%	10.90%	3.49%	32.92%	-3.64%	5.81%	-5.07%	7.77%

Correlation

The correlation between CETF.AX and MVB.AX is 0.08, 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	0.08
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.00
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.03
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2015	0.09

Return for Risk

CETF.AX vs. MVB.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: 17
CETF.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
CETF.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
CETF.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 17
CETF.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
CETF.AX Martin Ratio Rank: 18

MVB.AX

MVB.AX Risk / Return Rank: 21
MVB.AX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
MVB.AX Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
MVB.AX Omega Ratio Rank: 19
MVB.AX Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
MVB.AX Martin Ratio Rank: 21

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. MVB.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 Australian Banks ETF (MVB.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.AX	MVB.AX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.41	0.52	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.64	0.84	-0.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.10	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.54	0.84	-0.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.32	1.72	-0.40

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

The current CETF.AX Sharpe Ratio is 0.41, which is comparable to the MVB.AX Sharpe Ratio of 0.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CETF.AX and MVB.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.

Drawdowns

CETF.AX vs. MVB.AX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CETF.AX drawdown since its inception was -41.32%, smaller than the maximum MVB.AX drawdown of -46.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CETF.AX and MVB.AX.

Drawdown Indicators

	CETF.AX	MVB.AX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.32%	-46.37%	+5.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.01%	-11.94%	-0.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.05%	-18.97%	-0.08%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.90%	-21.31%	-12.59%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.95%	-46.37%	+5.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.16%	-4.79%	-10.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.78%	-7.24%	-16.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.97%	5.83%	-0.86%

Volatility

CETF.AX vs. MVB.AX - Volatility Comparison

VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF (CETF.AX) has a higher volatility of 6.66% compared to VanEck Australian Banks ETF (MVB.AX) at 4.95%. This indicates that CETF.AX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MVB.AX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CETF.AX	MVB.AX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.66%	4.95%	+1.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.49%	14.83%	-2.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.76%	19.18%	-3.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.84%	18.10%	+1.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.10%	20.41%	-0.31%

Dividends

CETF.AX vs. MVB.AX - Dividend Comparison

CETF.AX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.95%, less than MVB.AX's 2.40% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CETF.AX VanEck FTSE China A50 ETF	1.95%	1.94%	1.55%	2.94%	2.80%	1.80%	1.30%	1.28%	11.56%	1.08%	1.16%	3.19%
MVB.AX VanEck Australian Banks ETF	2.40%	2.42%	3.65%	6.41%	6.53%	6.65%	2.05%	3.47%	3.68%	8.62%	6.15%	5.51%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CETF.AX and MVB.AX in my portfolio?

CETF.AX and MVB.AX have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

What is the main difference between CETF.AX and MVB.AX?

CETF.AX is categorized as China Equities, while MVB.AX is Financials Equities. CETF.AX tracks FTSE China A50 Net Tax AUD Index, while MVB.AX tracks VanEck Australian Banks Index.