CNAA.DE vs. DBX9.DE
CNAA.DE (Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc) and DBX9.DE (Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C) are both China Equities funds - CNAA.DE tracks the MSCI China A while DBX9.DE tracks the FTSE China 50. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNAA.DE returned -0.21%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for DBX9.DE. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNAA.DE charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for DBX9.DE.
Performance
CNAA.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with CNAA.DE having a 9.91% return and DBX9.DE slightly lower at 9.85%.
CNAA.DE
- 1D
- -0.79%
- 1M
- 0.35%
- YTD
- 9.91%
- 6M
- 11.19%
- 1Y
- 33.60%
- 3Y*
- 8.43%
- 5Y*
- -0.21%
- 10Y*
- —
DBX9.DE
- 1D
- -0.73%
- 1M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- 9.85%
- 6M
- 11.95%
- 1Y
- 33.01%
- 3Y*
- 13.37%
- 5Y*
- 0.17%
- 10Y*
- 3.94%
CNAA.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNAA.DE Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc | 9.91% | 10.09% | 19.81% | -17.19% | -20.96% | 13.50% | 28.18% | 12.50% |
DBX9.DE Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C | 9.85% | 10.01% | 37.68% | -16.44% | -13.62% | -14.98% | -0.87% | 11.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNAA.DE and DBX9.DE is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2019 | 0.73 |
The correlation between CNAA.DE and DBX9.DE shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (all time) to 0.91 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
CNAA.DE vs. DBX9.DE — Risk / Return Rank
CNAA.DE
DBX9.DE
CNAA.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc (CNAA.DE) and Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (DBX9.DE). 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.
| CNAA.DE | DBX9.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.96 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.34 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.08 | 1.90 | +3.18 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.52 | 3.67 | +9.85 |
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
| CNAA.DE | DBX9.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.04 | 1.24 | +0.81 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.01 | 0.01 | -0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.15 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | 0.08 | +0.20 |
Drawdowns
CNAA.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNAA.DE drawdown since its inception was -43.90%, smaller than the maximum DBX9.DE drawdown of -66.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNAA.DE and DBX9.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNAA.DE | DBX9.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.90% | -66.51% | +22.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.65% | -17.20% | +10.55% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.84% | -27.83% | -0.01% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -41.85% | -47.59% | +5.74% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -53.98% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.33% | -14.62% | +3.29% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.23% | -29.50% | +10.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.50% | 8.91% | -6.41% |
Volatility
CNAA.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Volatility Comparison
Amundi MSCI China A UCITS ETF Acc (CNAA.DE) has a higher volatility of 6.13% compared to Xtrackers FTSE China 50 UCITS ETF 1C (DBX9.DE) at 5.29%. This indicates that CNAA.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DBX9.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNAA.DE | DBX9.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.13% | 5.29% | +0.84% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.38% | 10.45% | +0.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.52% | 26.35% | -9.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.44% | 28.75% | -7.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.51% | 25.42% | -2.91% |
CNAA.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNAA.DE has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than DBX9.DE's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNAA.DE vs. DBX9.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither CNAA.DE nor DBX9.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, CNAA.DE and DBX9.DE 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, CNAA.DE is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNAA.DE is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for DBX9.DE.
CNAA.DE tracks MSCI China A, while DBX9.DE tracks FTSE China 50. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CNAA.DE and 0.60% for DBX9.DE.
Find the right allocation for CNAA.DE and DBX9.DE
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