PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CNAA.L vs. FRCH.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

CNAA.L vs. FRCH.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAA.L) and Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

CNAA.L vs. FRCH.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
CNAA.L
Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR
-0.46%26.13%10.92%-14.20%-25.98%3.21%42.77%14.52%
FRCH.L
Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF
-5.59%32.52%19.10%-13.11%-23.05%-20.07%30.68%-6.93%
Different Trading Currencies

CNAA.L is traded in USD, while FRCH.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FRCH.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNAA.L achieves a -0.46% return, which is significantly higher than FRCH.L's -5.59% return.


CNAA.L

1D
1.30%
1M
-4.51%
YTD
-0.46%
6M
1.46%
1Y
25.36%
3Y*
4.57%
5Y*
-1.26%
10Y*
3.93%

FRCH.L

1D
1.38%
1M
-4.18%
YTD
-5.59%
6M
-12.62%
1Y
7.43%
3Y*
7.64%
5Y*
-4.83%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


CNAA.L vs. FRCH.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNAA.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FRCH.L's 0.19% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

CNAA.L vs. FRCH.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNAA.L
CNAA.L Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
CNAA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNAA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNAA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
CNAA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNAA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank

FRCH.L
FRCH.L Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
FRCH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
FRCH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
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.

CNAA.L vs. FRCH.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAA.L) and Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.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.


CNAA.LFRCH.LDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.44

0.35

+1.09

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.90

0.59

+1.31

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.08

+0.20

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.63

0.51

+2.12

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.86

1.34

+8.53

CNAA.L vs. FRCH.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNAA.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is higher than the FRCH.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNAA.L and FRCH.L, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CNAA.LFRCH.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.44

0.35

+1.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.06

-0.14

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.19

-0.01

+0.20

Correlation

The correlation between CNAA.L and FRCH.L is 0.76, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

CNAA.L vs. FRCH.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CNAA.L nor FRCH.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

CNAA.L vs. FRCH.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNAA.L drawdown since its inception was -56.07%, smaller than the maximum FRCH.L drawdown of -61.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNAA.L and FRCH.L.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


CNAA.LFRCH.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.07%

-56.27%

+0.20%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.00%

-14.86%

+3.86%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.82%

-49.50%

+4.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.66%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-21.61%

-30.18%

+8.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-33.29%

-29.71%

-3.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.58%

5.92%

-3.34%

Volatility

CNAA.L vs. FRCH.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAA.L) is 4.85%, while Franklin FTSE China UCITS ETF (FRCH.L) has a volatility of 5.98%. This indicates that CNAA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FRCH.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


CNAA.LFRCH.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.85%

5.98%

-1.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.40%

13.13%

-1.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.52%

21.32%

-3.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.36%

33.85%

-11.49%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.53%

32.45%

-9.92%