PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CGB.DE vs. XQUA.DE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CGB.DE vs. XQUA.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Xtrackers II Harvest China Government Bond UCITS ETF (Dist) (CGB.DE) and Xtrackers ESG USD Emerging Markets Bond Quality Weighted UCITS ETF 1D (XQUA.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGB.DE achieves a 8.22% return, which is significantly higher than XQUA.DE's 3.11% return. Over the past 10 years, CGB.DE has outperformed XQUA.DE with an annualized return of 2.41%, while XQUA.DE has yielded a comparatively lower 1.36% annualized return.


CGB.DE

1D
-0.05%
1M
1.36%
6M
6.23%
YTD
8.22%
1Y
9.90%
3Y*
4.82%
5Y*
3.10%
10Y*
2.41%

XQUA.DE

1D
0.11%
1M
0.33%
6M
1.88%
YTD
3.11%
1Y
7.50%
3Y*
3.82%
5Y*
0.12%
10Y*
1.36%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CGB.DE vs. XQUA.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CGB.DE
Xtrackers II Harvest China Government Bond UCITS ETF (Dist)
8.22%-6.58%9.93%-2.82%-0.10%15.85%-0.38%4.86%4.94%-7.90%
XQUA.DE
Xtrackers ESG USD Emerging Markets Bond Quality Weighted UCITS ETF 1D
3.11%-1.36%5.24%3.95%-12.55%6.78%-2.76%17.84%1.06%-5.20%

Correlation

The correlation between CGB.DE and XQUA.DE is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.53

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

0.39

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

0.40

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

0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 6, 2016

0.46

The correlation between CGB.DE and XQUA.DE shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (3 years) to 0.53 (1 year), 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.


Return for Risk

CGB.DE vs. XQUA.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGB.DE
CGB.DE Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
CGB.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGB.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGB.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
CGB.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGB.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank

XQUA.DE
XQUA.DE Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
XQUA.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XQUA.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
XQUA.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
XQUA.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
XQUA.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
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.

CGB.DE vs. XQUA.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers II Harvest China Government Bond UCITS ETF (Dist) (CGB.DE) and Xtrackers ESG USD Emerging Markets Bond Quality Weighted UCITS ETF 1D (XQUA.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.

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.


CGB.DEXQUA.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.48

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.74

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.24

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.48

1.84

+1.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.44

5.50

+4.93

CGB.DE vs. XQUA.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGB.DE Sharpe Ratio is 1.73, which is higher than the XQUA.DE Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGB.DE and XQUA.DE, 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

CGB.DE vs. XQUA.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGB.DE drawdown since its inception was -20.06%, roughly equal to the maximum XQUA.DE drawdown of -20.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGB.DE and XQUA.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CGB.DEXQUA.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.06%

-20.21%

+0.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.83%

-4.06%

+1.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.08%

-11.47%

+0.39%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.94%

-16.16%

+2.22%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-14.64%

-20.21%

+5.57%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.74%

-5.07%

+4.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.25%

-8.26%

-0.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.94%

1.36%

-0.42%

Volatility

CGB.DE vs. XQUA.DE - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers II Harvest China Government Bond UCITS ETF (Dist) (CGB.DE) has a higher volatility of 1.51% compared to Xtrackers ESG USD Emerging Markets Bond Quality Weighted UCITS ETF 1D (XQUA.DE) at 1.32%. This indicates that CGB.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XQUA.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CGB.DEXQUA.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.51%

1.32%

+0.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.98%

3.77%

+0.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.75%

6.10%

-0.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.73%

8.33%

-1.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.06%

8.81%

+2.25%

CGB.DE vs. XQUA.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGB.DE has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than XQUA.DE's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

CGB.DE vs. XQUA.DE - Dividend Comparison

CGB.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.99%, less than XQUA.DE's 4.52% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
CGB.DE
Xtrackers II Harvest China Government Bond UCITS ETF (Dist)
1.99%2.40%2.37%2.97%4.40%2.17%2.15%2.56%0.72%2.64%0.38%
XQUA.DE
Xtrackers ESG USD Emerging Markets Bond Quality Weighted UCITS ETF 1D
4.52%4.80%4.40%4.34%7.07%3.83%4.92%4.19%3.08%3.74%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CGB.DE and XQUA.DE have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CGB.DE is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CGB.DE is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for XQUA.DE.

CGB.DE tracks FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond 1-10 Years Capped Index, while XQUA.DE tracks JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CGB.DE and 0.45% for XQUA.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CGB.DE and XQUA.DE

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