CHI3.L vs. C300.L
CHI3.L (Leverage Shares 3x Long China ETP Securities) and C300.L (Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) are both China Equities funds. CHI3.L is actively managed, while C300.L is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CHI3.L returned -15.83%/yr vs 15.49%/yr for C300.L. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CHI3.L charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for C300.L.
Performance
CHI3.L vs. C300.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CHI3.L achieves a -36.01% return, which is significantly lower than C300.L's 12.15% return.
CHI3.L
- 1D
- 6.48%
- 1M
- -5.40%
- 6M
- -44.40%
- YTD
- -36.01%
- 1Y
- -29.49%
- 3Y*
- -15.83%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
C300.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -1.79%
- 6M
- 9.28%
- YTD
- 12.15%
- 1Y
- 38.21%
- 3Y*
- 15.49%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CHI3.L vs. C300.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CHI3.L Leverage Shares 3x Long China ETP Securities | -36.01% | 50.00% | 6.20% | -53.60% | -45.60% |
C300.L Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc | 12.15% | 33.78% | 14.79% | -11.81% | -5.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between CHI3.L and C300.L is 0.68, 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 | 0.68 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 10, 2022 | 0.73 |
The correlation between CHI3.L and C300.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
CHI3.L vs. C300.L — Risk / Return Rank
CHI3.L
C300.L
CHI3.L vs. C300.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 3x Long China ETP Securities (CHI3.L) and Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.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.
| CHI3.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.43 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.96 | 1.34 | -0.39 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.46 | 5.02 | -5.48 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.86 | 14.57 | -15.43 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CHI3.L vs. C300.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CHI3.L drawdown since its inception was -84.75%, which is greater than C300.L's maximum drawdown of -31.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CHI3.L and C300.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CHI3.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -84.75% | -31.77% | -52.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -63.95% | -7.64% | -56.31% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -65.83% | -28.06% | -37.77% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -77.35% | -4.93% | -72.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -64.92% | -13.81% | -51.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 34.35% | 2.63% | +31.72% |
Volatility
CHI3.L vs. C300.L - Volatility Comparison
Leverage Shares 3x Long China ETP Securities (CHI3.L) has a higher volatility of 17.27% compared to Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.L) at 9.15%. This indicates that CHI3.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than C300.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CHI3.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 17.27% | 9.15% | +8.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 45.76% | 15.26% | +30.50% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 61.04% | 19.76% | +41.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 83.01% | 22.34% | +60.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 83.01% | 22.34% | +60.67% |
CHI3.L vs. C300.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CHI3.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than C300.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
CHI3.L vs. C300.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CHI3.L nor C300.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CHI3.L and C300.L have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, C300.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
C300.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CHI3.L.
They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CHI3.L and 0.35% for C300.L.
Find the right allocation for CHI3.L and C300.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