PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L) and Amundi MSCI Pacific ex Japan UCITS DR (CP9G.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CI2G.L achieves a -12.55% return, which is significantly lower than CP9G.L's 2.12% return. Over the past 10 years, CI2G.L has outperformed CP9G.L with an annualized return of 7.30%, while CP9G.L has yielded a comparatively lower 5.57% annualized return.


CI2G.L

1D
1.23%
1M
-3.40%
YTD
-12.55%
6M
-13.41%
1Y
-12.56%
3Y*
1.96%
5Y*
3.82%
10Y*
7.30%

CP9G.L

1D
-0.61%
1M
-5.20%
YTD
2.12%
6M
1.85%
1Y
3.71%
3Y*
2.90%
5Y*
1.86%
10Y*
5.57%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CI2G.L
Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD
-12.55%-5.46%11.34%12.20%2.39%24.86%10.51%1.30%-2.46%24.58%
CP9G.L
Amundi MSCI Pacific ex Japan UCITS DR
2.12%5.89%0.85%-0.56%-1.42%6.76%0.48%13.35%-5.17%14.63%

Correlation

The correlation between CI2G.L and CP9G.L is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.36

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

0.31

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

0.34

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

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2015

0.49

The correlation between CI2G.L and CP9G.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.31 (3 years) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CI2G.L
CP9G.L

Financial Services

28.3%
48.0%

Consumer Cyclical

12.4%
3.9%

Industrials

10.2%
11.3%

Energy

9.5%

-

Basic Materials

8.5%
10.4%

Technology

8.2%
2.2%

Consumer Defensive

6.2%
3.1%

Healthcare

6.1%
4.7%

Communication Services

4.7%
2.5%

Utilities

4.5%
1.6%

Real Estate

1.3%
12.3%

Financial Services

CI2G.L
28.3%
CP9G.L
48.0%

Consumer Cyclical

CI2G.L
12.4%
CP9G.L
3.9%

Industrials

CI2G.L
10.2%
CP9G.L
11.3%

Energy

CI2G.L
9.5%
CP9G.L

-

Basic Materials

CI2G.L
8.5%
CP9G.L
10.4%

Technology

CI2G.L
8.2%
CP9G.L
2.2%

Consumer Defensive

CI2G.L
6.2%
CP9G.L
3.1%

Healthcare

CI2G.L
6.1%
CP9G.L
4.7%

Communication Services

CI2G.L
4.7%
CP9G.L
2.5%

Utilities

CI2G.L
4.5%
CP9G.L
1.6%

Real Estate

CI2G.L
1.3%
CP9G.L
12.3%

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

CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CI2G.L
CI2G.L Risk / Return Rank: 33
Overall Rank
CI2G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CI2G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
CI2G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
CI2G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
CI2G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

CP9G.L
CP9G.L Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
CP9G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CP9G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
CP9G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
CP9G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
CP9G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
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.

CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L) and Amundi MSCI Pacific ex Japan UCITS DR (CP9G.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.


CI2G.LCP9G.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.08

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.89

1.07

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.59

0.50

-1.10

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.37

1.44

-2.80

CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CI2G.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.75, which is lower than the CP9G.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CI2G.L and CP9G.L, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CI2G.LCP9G.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.75

0.33

-1.08

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

0.13

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.37

0.36

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.40

0.40

0.00

Drawdowns

CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CI2G.L drawdown since its inception was -37.13%, which is greater than CP9G.L's maximum drawdown of -32.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CI2G.L and CP9G.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CI2G.LCP9G.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.13%

-32.32%

-4.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-20.32%

-8.26%

-12.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.30%

-15.80%

-11.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.30%

-18.14%

-9.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.13%

-32.32%

-4.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-23.55%

-5.85%

-17.70%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.24%

-6.04%

-1.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.84%

2.91%

+5.93%

Volatility

CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L) has a higher volatility of 5.70% compared to Amundi MSCI Pacific ex Japan UCITS DR (CP9G.L) at 4.27%. This indicates that CI2G.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CP9G.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CI2G.LCP9G.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.70%

4.27%

+1.43%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.70%

10.42%

+3.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.10%

12.62%

+3.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.04%

13.91%

+2.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.77%

15.70%

+4.07%

CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CI2G.L has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than CP9G.L's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

CI2G.L vs. CP9G.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CI2G.L nor CP9G.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CI2G.L and CP9G.L have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CP9G.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CP9G.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for CI2G.L.

CI2G.L tracks MSCI India NR USD, while CP9G.L tracks MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for CI2G.L and 0.35% for CP9G.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CI2G.L and CP9G.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