CM5S.L vs. C300.L
CM5S.L (Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) and C300.L (Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) are both China Equities funds from Invesco - CM5S.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY while C300.L tracks the S&P China A 300 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CM5S.L returned 19.85%/yr vs 13.94%/yr for C300.L. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.
Performance
CM5S.L vs. C300.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CM5S.L is traded in GBp, while C300.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the C300.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CM5S.L achieves a 19.25% return, which is significantly higher than C300.L's 15.06% return.
CM5S.L
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 2.36%
- YTD
- 19.25%
- 6M
- 27.95%
- 1Y
- 71.20%
- 3Y*
- 19.85%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
C300.L
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- 4.41%
- YTD
- 15.06%
- 6M
- 18.59%
- 1Y
- 51.03%
- 3Y*
- 13.94%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CM5S.L vs. C300.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CM5S.L Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc | 19.25% | 42.07% | 14.29% | -14.04% | 13.69% |
C300.L Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc | 15.06% | 24.25% | 16.79% | -16.21% | 3.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between CM5S.L and C300.L is 0.78, 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 | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2022 | 0.81 |
The correlation between CM5S.L and C300.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.81 - 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
CM5S.L vs. C300.L — Risk / Return Rank
CM5S.L
C300.L
CM5S.L vs. C300.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CM5S.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.
| CM5S.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.57 | 1.53 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.48 | 7.50 | -2.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 21.45 | 22.25 | -0.80 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CM5S.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.49 | 2.98 | +0.51 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.68 | 0.45 | +0.23 |
Drawdowns
CM5S.L vs. C300.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CM5S.L drawdown since its inception was -38.57%, which is greater than C300.L's maximum drawdown of -34.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CM5S.L and C300.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CM5S.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.57% | -34.94% | -3.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.93% | -6.77% | -6.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.12% | -26.04% | -0.08% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.43% | -0.88% | -3.55% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.46% | -15.41% | +1.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.31% | 2.29% | +1.02% |
Volatility
CM5S.L vs. C300.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P China A MidCap 500 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (CM5S.L) has a higher volatility of 6.29% compared to Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.L) at 5.67%. This indicates that CM5S.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
| CM5S.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.29% | 5.67% | +0.62% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.26% | 12.24% | +3.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.30% | 17.06% | +3.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.03% | 21.19% | +3.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.03% | 21.19% | +3.84% |
CM5S.L vs. C300.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both CM5S.L and C300.L have an expense ratio of 0.35%.
Dividends
CM5S.L vs. C300.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CM5S.L nor C300.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CM5S.L and C300.L have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CM5S.L and C300.L have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.
CM5S.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while C300.L tracks S&P China A 300 Index.
Find the right allocation for CM5S.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