CI2G.L vs. XNIF.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

CI2G.L (Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD) and XNIF.L (Xtrackers Nifty 50 Swap UCITS ETF 1C) are both India Equities funds tracking the MSCI India NR USD, from Amundi and Xtrackers respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CI2G.L returned 6.61%/yr vs 6.17%/yr for XNIF.L. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CI2G.L charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for XNIF.L.

Performance

CI2G.L vs. XNIF.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 Xtrackers Nifty 50 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XNIF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CI2G.L achieves a -10.36% return, which is significantly higher than XNIF.L's -13.58% return. Over the past 10 years, CI2G.L has outperformed XNIF.L with an annualized return of 6.61%, while XNIF.L has yielded a comparatively lower 6.17% annualized return.

CI2G.L

• 1D: 0.99%
• 1M: -1.49%
• 6M: -8.25%
• YTD: -10.36%
• 1Y: -12.51%
• 3Y*: 2.41%
• 5Y*: 4.26%
• 10Y*: 6.61%

XNIF.L

• 1D: 1.22%
• 1M: -1.22%
• 6M: -11.12%
• YTD: -13.58%
• 1Y: -14.30%
• 3Y*: 0.19%
• 5Y*: 3.66%
• 10Y*: 6.17%

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CI2G.L Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD	-10.36%	-5.26%	11.34%	12.20%	2.39%	24.86%	10.51%	1.30%	-2.54%	36.62%
XNIF.L Xtrackers Nifty 50 Swap UCITS ETF 1C	-13.58%	-1.71%	6.70%	11.98%	5.08%	23.10%	7.50%	5.06%	-1.17%	23.90%

Correlation

The correlation between CI2G.L and XNIF.L is 0.96 - 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	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2010	0.81

The correlation between CI2G.L and XNIF.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.81 (all time) to 0.96 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors	CI2G.L	XNIF.L
Financial Services	28.3%	11.0%
Consumer Cyclical	12.5%	19.7%
Industrials	10.7%	2.3%
Energy	9.0%	5.4%
Basic Materials	8.4%	2.6%
Technology	8.2%	22.4%
Healthcare	6.3%	11.0%
Consumer Defensive	6.0%	7.7%
Communication Services	4.7%	17.1%
Utilities	4.5%	0.9%
Real Estate	1.4%	-

Return for Risk

CI2G.L vs. XNIF.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: 3
CI2G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
CI2G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
CI2G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3
CI2G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
CI2G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3

XNIF.L

XNIF.L Risk / Return Rank: 3
XNIF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
XNIF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
XNIF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3
XNIF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
XNIF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3

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. XNIF.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 Xtrackers Nifty 50 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XNIF.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.

	CI2G.L	XNIF.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.79	-0.94	+0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.07	-1.32	+0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.88	0.86	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.63	-0.68	+0.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.25	-1.24	-0.01

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

The current CI2G.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.79, which is comparable to the XNIF.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CI2G.L and XNIF.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.

Drawdowns

CI2G.L vs. XNIF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CI2G.L drawdown since its inception was -45.02%, smaller than the maximum XNIF.L drawdown of -78.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CI2G.L and XNIF.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CI2G.L	XNIF.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.02%	-78.21%	+33.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.88%	-21.09%	+1.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.75%	-25.36%	-1.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.75%	-25.36%	-1.39%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.13%	-38.55%	+1.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.46%	-21.79%	+0.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.42%	-33.76%	+20.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.01%	11.52%	-1.51%

Volatility

CI2G.L vs. XNIF.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI India UCITS ETF USD (CI2G.L) and Xtrackers Nifty 50 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XNIF.L) have volatilities of 4.15% and 4.36%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CI2G.L	XNIF.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.15%	4.36%	-0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.02%	12.78%	+0.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.75%	15.13%	+0.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.05%	20.78%	-4.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.19%	21.81%	-2.62%

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

CI2G.L has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is lower than XNIF.L's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

CI2G.L vs. XNIF.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CI2G.L and XNIF.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, CI2G.L and XNIF.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.

Which ETF is better, CI2G.L or XNIF.L?

On fees, CI2G.L is cheaper at 0.80% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CI2G.L or XNIF.L?

CI2G.L is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for XNIF.L.

What is the main difference between CI2G.L and XNIF.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI India NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for CI2G.L and 0.85% for XNIF.L.