CHI3.L vs. LCCN.L
CHI3.L (Leverage Shares 3x Long China ETP Securities) and LCCN.L (Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc) are both China Equities funds. CHI3.L is actively managed, while LCCN.L is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CHI3.L returned -15.83%/yr vs 8.66%/yr for LCCN.L. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. CHI3.L charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for LCCN.L.
Performance
CHI3.L vs. LCCN.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 LCCN.L's -8.72% return.
CHI3.L
- 1D
- 6.48%
- 1M
- -5.40%
- 6M
- -44.40%
- YTD
- -36.01%
- 1Y
- -29.49%
- 3Y*
- -15.83%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LCCN.L
- 1D
- 2.05%
- 1M
- -0.85%
- 6M
- -13.44%
- YTD
- -8.72%
- 1Y
- -0.57%
- 3Y*
- 8.66%
- 5Y*
- -4.23%
- 10Y*
- —
CHI3.L vs. LCCN.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% |
LCCN.L Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc | -8.72% | 31.99% | 19.37% | -11.59% | -9.46% |
Correlation
The correlation between CHI3.L and LCCN.L is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.99 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.99 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 10, 2022 | 0.97 |
The correlation between CHI3.L and LCCN.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.99 - 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. LCCN.L — Risk / Return Rank
CHI3.L
LCCN.L
CHI3.L vs. LCCN.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 Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc (LCCN.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 | LCCN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.96 | 1.01 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.46 | -0.03 | -0.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.86 | -0.05 | -0.80 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CHI3.L vs. LCCN.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CHI3.L drawdown since its inception was -84.75%, which is greater than LCCN.L's maximum drawdown of -62.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CHI3.L and LCCN.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CHI3.L | LCCN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -84.75% | -62.38% | -22.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -63.95% | -22.74% | -41.21% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -65.83% | -25.53% | -40.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -53.18% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -77.35% | -35.27% | -42.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -64.92% | -29.90% | -35.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 34.35% | 10.49% | +23.86% |
Volatility
CHI3.L vs. LCCN.L - Volatility Comparison
Leverage Shares 3x Long China ETP Securities (CHI3.L) has a higher volatility of 17.27% compared to Lyxor MSCI China UCITS ETF - Acc (LCCN.L) at 5.49%. This indicates that CHI3.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LCCN.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CHI3.L | LCCN.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 17.27% | 5.49% | +11.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 45.76% | 15.17% | +30.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 61.04% | 20.46% | +40.58% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 83.01% | 29.35% | +53.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 83.01% | 27.61% | +55.40% |
CHI3.L vs. LCCN.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CHI3.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than LCCN.L's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
CHI3.L vs. LCCN.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CHI3.L nor LCCN.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.99, CHI3.L and LCCN.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, LCCN.L is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LCCN.L is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CHI3.L.
They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CHI3.L and 0.29% for LCCN.L.
Find the right allocation for CHI3.L and LCCN.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