CNAL.L vs. C300.L
CNAL.L (Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR) and C300.L (Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc) are both China Equities funds - CNAL.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, CNAL.L returned 7.96%/yr vs 13.94%/yr for C300.L. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.
Performance
CNAL.L vs. C300.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CNAL.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, CNAL.L achieves a 8.97% return, which is significantly lower than C300.L's 15.06% return.
CNAL.L
- 1D
- -0.64%
- 1M
- 2.13%
- YTD
- 8.97%
- 6M
- 12.11%
- 1Y
- 37.56%
- 3Y*
- 7.96%
- 5Y*
- -0.03%
- 10Y*
- —
C300.L
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- 4.41%
- YTD
- 15.06%
- 6M
- 18.59%
- 1Y
- 51.03%
- 3Y*
- 13.94%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CNAL.L vs. C300.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNAL.L Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR | 8.97% | 16.96% | 16.16% | -18.82% | 1.44% |
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 CNAL.L and C300.L is 0.93, 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 | 0.93 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2022 | 0.52 |
Over the past year, CNAL.L and C300.L have become more correlated (0.93) than their long-term average of 0.52, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
CNAL.L vs. C300.L — Risk / Return Rank
CNAL.L
C300.L
CNAL.L vs. C300.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.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.
| CNAL.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.53 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.41 | 7.50 | -2.09 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.33 | 22.25 | -6.91 |
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
| CNAL.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.41 | 2.98 | -0.57 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.00 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.33 | 0.45 | -0.12 |
Drawdowns
CNAL.L vs. C300.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNAL.L drawdown since its inception was -44.83%, 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 CNAL.L and C300.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNAL.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.83% | -34.94% | -9.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.91% | -6.77% | -0.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.58% | -26.04% | -0.54% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.19% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.26% | -0.88% | -10.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -21.39% | -15.41% | -5.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.44% | 2.29% | +0.15% |
Volatility
CNAL.L vs. C300.L - Volatility Comparison
Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.L) and Invesco S&P China A 300 Swap UCITS ETF Acc (C300.L) have volatilities of 5.51% and 5.67%, 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNAL.L | C300.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.51% | 5.67% | -0.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.58% | 12.24% | -1.66% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.52% | 17.06% | -1.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.33% | 21.19% | +10.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 40.07% | 21.19% | +18.88% |
CNAL.L vs. C300.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both CNAL.L and C300.L have an expense ratio of 0.35%.
Dividends
CNAL.L vs. C300.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CNAL.L nor C300.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.93, CNAL.L and C300.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.
Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNAL.L and C300.L have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.
CNAL.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while C300.L tracks S&P China A 300 Index. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Invesco.
Find the right allocation for CNAL.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