CNAL.L vs. CC1U.L
CNAL.L (Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR) and CC1U.L (Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF-C USD) are both China Equities funds from Amundi - CNAL.L tracks the MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY while CC1U.L tracks the MSCI China NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNAL.L returned 0.80%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for CC1U.L. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNAL.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CC1U.L.
Performance
CNAL.L vs. CC1U.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CNAL.L is traded in GBp, while CC1U.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CC1U.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 13.91% return, which is significantly higher than CC1U.L's -2.96% return.
CNAL.L
- 1D
- 1.52%
- 1M
- 3.45%
- YTD
- 13.91%
- 6M
- 14.81%
- 1Y
- 40.49%
- 3Y*
- 12.02%
- 5Y*
- 0.80%
- 10Y*
- 5.75%
CC1U.L
- 1D
- -0.68%
- 1M
- -5.02%
- YTD
- -2.96%
- 6M
- -3.09%
- 1Y
- 23.99%
- 3Y*
- 2.81%
- 5Y*
- 0.77%
- 10Y*
- —
CNAL.L vs. CC1U.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNAL.L Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR | 13.91% | 17.54% | 12.76% | -18.90% | -17.14% | 4.51% | 37.96% | 32.57% | -21.04% |
CC1U.L Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF-C USD | -2.96% | 29.55% | 3.31% | -15.76% | 1.46% | -2.18% | -4.73% | 8.60% | -10.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between CNAL.L and CC1U.L is 0.82, 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 | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2018 | 0.71 |
The correlation between CNAL.L and CC1U.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (all time) to 0.82 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CNAL.L vs. CC1U.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
Energy
-
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
Financial Services
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
Industrials
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
Basic Materials
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
Consumer Defensive
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
Consumer Cyclical
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
Healthcare
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
Utilities
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
Energy
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
-
Communication Services
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
Real Estate
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
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. CC1U.L — Risk / Return Rank
CNAL.L
CC1U.L
CNAL.L vs. CC1U.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 Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF-C USD (CC1U.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.
| CNAL.L | CC1U.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.41 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.73 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.19 | +0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.83 | 1.47 | +4.36 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.58 | 2.84 | +12.74 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CNAL.L vs. CC1U.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CNAL.L drawdown since its inception was -51.00%, which is greater than CC1U.L's maximum drawdown of -41.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNAL.L and CC1U.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CNAL.L | CC1U.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.00% | -41.89% | -9.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.91% | -16.27% | +9.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.58% | -38.90% | +12.32% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.38% | -40.75% | -1.63% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.10% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.42% | -13.97% | +6.55% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.81% | -13.49% | -13.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.59% | 8.43% | -5.84% |
Volatility
CNAL.L vs. CC1U.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Lyxor Fortune SG UCITS MSCI China A DR (CNAL.L) is 6.16%, while Amundi MSCI China UCITS ETF-C USD (CC1U.L) has a volatility of 7.00%. This indicates that CNAL.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CC1U.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CNAL.L | CC1U.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.16% | 7.00% | -0.84% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.48% | 15.41% | -3.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.40% | 22.68% | -6.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.50% | 26.10% | -4.60% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.94% | 24.78% | -2.84% |
CNAL.L vs. CC1U.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CNAL.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CC1U.L's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
CNAL.L vs. CC1U.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CNAL.L nor CC1U.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CNAL.L and CC1U.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNAL.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNAL.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CC1U.L.
CNAL.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY, while CC1U.L tracks MSCI China NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CNAL.L and 0.45% for CC1U.L.
Find the right allocation for CNAL.L and CC1U.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